[Sahhaese]

That is why I like Michael Feathers' definition of legacy code, which is (paraphrasing):

> Legacy code is code not under test

That said, I'm not against the existence of legacy code, but any bugs damn well should be written up as tests to catch regressions.

That way new development can be done without tests (full TDD is tedious and often way too coupled to implementation imo) but any bugs are captured in a way that can't be tests written against the implementation and guard against regression.