Hi Paul,

This article is the result of research focused only on code coverage and on the premise that forcing high coverage may have less value than expected, because random tests already achieve a high code coverage. And like any research, you become an expert of just one thing, without covering the surrounds.

That is why it focuses only in code coverage. Yet, the claim of "the metric", it should not appear in the article, and I do not find it (the first paragraph states "is a strong metric", not "the metric"). So, where is it, so I can fix it?

About the other aspect, that is why I explain the two rules. And why I explain that random tests only cover rule 1 (functions), but they can only cover rule 2 (branches) in a limited way because it lacks of the knowledge of the purpose of the function.

And yes, for a good developer, that works correctly with TDD, 100% is very easy to achieve, and almost expected.

So please, sorry for any misunderstanding and I would appreciate the indications about where they were created.