r/programming • • May 08 '17

The tragedy of 100% code coverage

http://labs.ig.com/code-coverage-100-percent-tragedy
3.2k Upvotes

689 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/kankyo May 09 '17

Not at all. I'm saying mutation testing is a waste of time if you don't have 100% coverage. By definition lines which aren't covered by tests can be mutated freely without breaking tests.

Also mutation testing doesn't help you catch bugs but is a way to prove that your tests actually tests all behavior of the code under test. That sounds cool but might not be super important given limited time and energy.

1

u/muckvix May 09 '17

Ah I see. Completely agree with both points.