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?

  • MagicShel@programming.devEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    Pit Mutation testing is useful. It basically tests how effective your tests are and tells you missed conditions that aren’t being tested.

    For Java: https://pitest.org

    Edit: corrected to the more general name instead of a specific implementation.

  • fades@beehaw.orgEnglish
    01·
    1 year ago

    So true lol. Mgmt just announced a directive at my work last week that code must have 95-100% coverage.

    Meanwhile they hire contractors from india that write the dumbest, most useless tests possible. I’ve worked with many great Indian devs but the contractors we use today all seem like a step down in quality. More work for me I guess