[NateEag]

100% code coverage isn't even close to a guarantee of correctness.

[o-__-o]

But is the easiest metric to guage test quality. What I’m saying is this code is probably not well tested

[dr_zoidberg]

This code isn't tested at all. They messed up copying code from a previous implementation, that's how bad this is. If they had had a few basic tests in place they would've spotted this before it even had a chance to be a problem.

[o-__-o]

Then the problem has zero to do with the type of testing, now does it :)