[ChrisMarshallNY]

I wouldn’t know, but it was certainly presented as a “general feel,” and, anecdotally, almost every interaction that I’ve personally had with “modern” tech companies (in fact, with one, it resulted in a multimillion-dollar disaster), have shown me that “feel.”

The disaster I mentioned was particularly heartbreaking, because the tech was solid, and the people behind it, were good, but they absolutely refused to give respect to Quality, and everything went to shit.

Just look at the way any discussion of Quality Development gets treated on HN. This very post nosedived, ten minutes after it posted. The only reason that it’s still around, is because it must have been “second-chanced.”

[taeric]

I have seen people that love to argue the straw man of why 100% code coverage is not something that will often, if ever, give 100% confidence that your product is correct. But I have never met anyone that would not agree that <50% test coverage is a red flag. Could get most people up to about 85% before they would balk at the focus.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I would take it a bit further: https://littlegreenviper.com/testing-harness-vs-unit/