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?

  • vampatori@feddit.ukOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That makes sense, thank you. Yes, it’s specifically “test quality” I’m looking to measure, as 100% coverage is effectively meaningless if the tests are poor.

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea I’m afraid the only real way to “measure” that is to read through the tests and the code and make a good ol human value judgement on the state of the code and tests. But it won’t give you a number.