On Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:29:53 Walter Bright wrote: > On 4/3/2013 11:08 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > I'm very much in > > favor of having 100% test coverage on every line that _can_ be tested > > (there may be rare exceptions to that, but I don't think that > > std.datetime has any of them). > > I'd be shocked if running -cov for the first time *didn't* come up with > issues.
Yes. My point was that 100% should be the goal, whereas I know a number of developers who consider something like 70% to be sufficient - and these are folks who actually believe in writing unit tests. Certainly, expecting to hit 100% with -cov on the first try isn't generally very realistic unless you're always extremely thorough with your tests, and even then, it's easy to miss a line or two on rarer branches, especially as functions become more complex. - Jonathan M Davis
