On the contrary to code coverage that tells how much of the code is covered by the tests, I thrive for considering how much of the promises are covered.
100% coverage does not mean anything from the user experience perspective. Worse, it hides the fact that maybe a lot of those 100% are just dead code never used, but only tested.
Notes linking here
- place of tests in software development
- unintended consequences of code coverage
- verified/proved promised contracts based programming