Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
> outside of our bubble the quality of software is pretty bad

It's pretty bad inside the bubble too.

I’ve probably worked on 100+ software and hardware products for consumers, military and industry

.0001% of that software had formal verification, bitwise memory management, 100% test coverage, clean documentation and specifications, a clear roadmap, long term sustainability plan and sustainable economics

Technology is like a good meal: only possible for a moment and only a moment.

too early and it’s inedible too late and it’s spoiled.

Thirty minutes spent talking to users is worth multiple percentage points of test coverage.
What if i told you

User testing is part of test coverage

> 100% test coverage

I don’t believe in 100% test coverage. Especially outside some very specific cases, it just adds a lot of code with little to no value.

loading story #50244221
It really depends on the shape of the tests and the shape of the language. Eg: Untyped languages often have tests that effectively implement a type system as software grows and the developer count grows. That seems like a waste…

Writing a good test or good set of tests does take effort but enforcing 100% coverage often pushes some folks to just run the code in any way possible within the test subsystem.

I also do not believe in it, rather I believe in 100% test coverage for the money-making code. Which is something like 5% of a product in reality.
It’s a question of the degree to which you want a self audit to be native to your structure or not

if you are confident that the complexity of what you have built can be fully tracked in your head then either you are some sort of God or you’re not used to building complicated enough things with critical failures attached to them

.0001% of 100 projects is less than a single one of those projects. :)
Hehe thank you for that. It made me laughed. I fully agree of course.
The call is coming from inside the bubble!