I’ve heard managers and teams mandating 100% code coverage for applications. That’s a really bad idea. The problem is that you get diminishing returns on our tests as the coverage increases much beyond 70% (I made that number up… no science there). Why is that? Well, when you strive for 100% all the time, you find yourself spending time testing things that really don’t need to be tested. Things that really have no logic in them at all (so any bugs could be caught by ESLint and Flow). Maintaining tests like this actually really slow you and your team down.
Recent articles
- AI assisted search-based research actually works now - 21st April 2025
- Maybe Meta's Llama claims to be open source because of the EU AI act - 19th April 2025
- Image segmentation using Gemini 2.5 - 18th April 2025