84
100% code coverage is near-meaningless - but is there a good measure to use? (feddit.uk)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Is there some formal way(s) of quantifying potential flaws, or risk, and ensuring there's sufficient spread of tests to cover them? Perhaps using some kind of complexity measure? Or a risk assessment of some kind?

Experience tells me I need to be extra careful around certain things - user input, code generation, anything with a publicly exposed surface, third-party libraries/services, financial data, personal information (especially of minors), batch data manipulation/migration, and so on.

But is there any accepted means of formally measuring a system and ensuring that some level of test quality exists?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

On top or, better, in addition to mutation testing, some amount of property-based testing is always great where it counts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Additionally I like roundtrip tests.

    For example we have two data formats and support conversion between both of them.

    So I have tests that convert from A to B and back to A. Then I can go and call assertEquals on them.

    It's a very cheap test, that tests all functionality of the conversion itself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent