This post originated from an RSS feed registered with .NET Buzz by Scott Hanselman. Original Post: Test Coverage IS important... Feed Title: Scott Hanselman's ComputerZen.com Feed URL: http://radio-weblogs.com/0106747/rss.xml Feed Description: Scott Hanselman's ComputerZen.com is a .NET/WebServices/XML Weblog. I offer details of obscurities (internals of ASP.NET, WebServices, XML, etc) and best practices from real world scenarios. Latest .NET Buzz Posts Latest .NET Buzz Posts by Scott Hanselman Latest Posts From Scott Hanselman's ComputerZen.com

This fellow said:

"I would much rather aim for 100% test-driven development than aim for 100% test coverage."

But I fear he's missing the point.  If I'm only testing 1% of my code paths, 100% of the time, what am I accomplishing? Squat. 

As my boss has said, adding a non-intrusive code coverage tool to an already successful unit-testing strategy can absolutely find gaps in coverage that staring at the screen just won't find. 

But juxtaposing 100% TDD with a 100% coverage goal doesn't make sense.  They are complimentary, parallel even, but not opposing goals.