Re:Laying myself off from Amazon
by latchkey on Wednesday November 16, 2022 @06:01PM
(#33632204)
Just what I thought, thanks for the confirmation. HN loves to take a number and just run with it, without verifying anything.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
No, my requirement was actually 100%. I have no reason to lie about this. It’s set at a package level.
Was this just you or everyone on your team?
everybody on my team. Are you seriously implying I was put on some kind of special "extra testing required" probation system where the unit test coverage requirement was upped from 95% to 100%?
Are you trolling?
It sounds kind of absurd really. I've never once been asked to sign a contract that required me to do 100% code coverage. As others have noted in the thread, it is like some mythical number any way. It sounds to me like this wasn't going to end well since the expectations were wonky from the start.
https://jestjs.io/docs/configuration#coveragethreshold-objec...
It is absolutely possible to set the coverage threshold in Jest to 100% for all categories and they are set to that in the codebase I worked on. I would spend hours trying to that last 0.02% covered sometimes.
The mythical portion of the number is that last 0.02%... the stuff that is just extra work for no logical benefit.
It does make me wonder why it would take you hours to do that though... was the code that complicated to test for some reason?
Yes, it was. It used a very obscure language feature of JavaScript. I won't get more detailed than that.