This post originated from an RSS feed registered with .NET Buzz by Steve Hebert. Original Post: Code Coverage Analysis and non-TDD projects Feed Title: Steve Hebert's Development Blog Feed URL: /error.htm?aspxerrorpath=/blogs/steve.hebert/rss.aspx Feed Description: .Steve's .Blog - Including .Net, SQL Server, .Math and everything in between Latest .NET Buzz Posts Latest .NET Buzz Posts by Steve Hebert Latest Posts From Steve Hebert's Development Blog

I'm looking at code coverage analysis and everyone regardless of methodology says 'shoot for 80-90% coverage'. 

I'm very curious about non-TDD projects where only acceptance testing is automated.  On this type of product, you come up with a test plan and implement it and then run code coverage analysis during the test run and come up with a number.  What is that initial number? 

The reason I ask is if the initial coverage average is something like 40%, then I am having to spend a tremendous amount of effort to meet my 80% minimum guideline during the test/debug phase. Not to mention the effort to understand what test patterns will return the biggest coverage gain.  And how does that compare to initial TDD numbers?