[keithnz]

Correctness is by definition, you say what your code should do in various situations. You can then automatically verify that is the case ( using whatever method ). You need to capture "correctness" in some form. For things you can't think of, and then learn about, you add that stuff to your definition of correctness. I'm not arguing for TDD ( or against ), I'm asking if they don't use TDD, what do they do to capture correctness? I'm interested to know. TDD certainly doesn't try to cover correctness at all levels of software deployment, but it does try to capture fine grained correctness.

Sometimes correctness isn't that valuable compared to other criteria as faults can be quickly corrected and have minimal impact. But I think you need clarity about the tradeoffs you make.

EDIT: in some situations things can be corrected quickly.