News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:99% code coverage (2017) by JoeAltmaier on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @08:37AM (#18920681)
In a complex system a feature test can detect a problem but not diagnose it. For that a unit test is desirable.

The hole you get into is, lots of units are changed and a feature quits working and everybody says 'its not me!' and it doesn't get fixed.

Re:99% code coverage (2017) by austincheney on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @09:48AM (#18921252)
> and everybody says 'its not me!' and it doesn't get fixed.

Test automation is not a remedy to prop up broken leadership. I would appoint an arbitrary owner of the defect and that person would visit with other people as necessary to remove or dismiss various functionality from blame one by one. Once the appropriate collision of changes is discovered it will become more clear how to address resolution.

Re:99% code coverage (2017) by JoeAltmaier on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:09AM (#18921429)
...and they would do that by writing individual unit tests.
Re:99% code coverage (2017) by closeparen on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:33PM (#18928130)
Your development process should not allow someone to merge a change that fails the test suite, nor one that is too large to reason about.