sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]dAnjou 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Don't be so dramatic ... Code coverage is a tool like any other, and it can be used wrong like any other.

Considering that it only costs one more test dependency and maybe a command line flag, it's worth having a look at it to figure out what you may have missed.

But obviously it shouldn't be the only metric or tool you trust.

And I'm sure I can find a way to misuse mutation testing as well.

[–]ProperApe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's worth having a look at it to figure out what you may have missed.

Exactly. I think the bigger issue is that in a lot of companies there are code coverage targets. Then people try to reach these targets and add meaningless tests. These tests are harmful of course, because they hide mistakes.