100% unit test coverage

I write a lot of stupid and useless unit tests. I confess that I'm aiming towards the elusive 100% test coverage. Sure, I'll never get there, and I realize it is not even a desirable goal. After an assessed threshold, we start to get diminishing returns. Why do I keep writing wrong tests then? Which unit tests should I leave out?

My case is that it is tricky to write a large codebase with only valuable tests. I dare say that some (minority) of the essential tests might have outright bad practices where they end up testing how well I can mock stuff. The value of the test is not predetermined; hence I keep writing a lot of seemingly poor ones.

There is an argument that high test coverage does not strongly reduce bugs and increase maintainability. That is likely true. Nonetheless, it is not so apparent which tests will avoid the most bugs or are the most useful in refactoring in the long term. The cliché is that requirements change, sometimes towards unknown directions.

It is more time-consuming but ultimately more robust to test everything, and trust that some semi-unknown set is the proper safeguard against bugs and most valuable while refactoring. Is this approach practical? In some cases, yes. Take SQLite, famous for its superb reliability, achieved partially by 100% machine code level test coverage.

Comments

I'm not a passionate developer

A family friend of mine is an airlane pilot. A dream job for most, right? As a child, I certainly thought so. Now that I can have grown-up talks with him, I have discovered a more accurate description of his profession. He says that the truth about the job is that it is boring. To me, that is not that surprising. Airplanes are cool and all, but when you are in the middle of the Atlantic sitting next to the colleague you have been talking to past five years, how stimulating can that be? When he says the job is boring, it is not a bad kind of boring. It is a very specific boring. The "boring" you would want as a passenger. Uneventful. Yet, he loves his job. According to him, an experienced pilot is most pleased when each and every tiny thing in the flight plan - goes according to plan. Passengers in the cabin of an expert pilot sit in the comfort of not even noticing who is flying. As someone employed in a field where being boring is not exactly in high demand, this sounds pro...

PydanticAI + evals + LiteLLM pipeline

I gave a tech talk at a Python meetup titled "Overengineering an LLM pipeline". It's based on my experiences of building production-grade stuff with LLMs I'm not sure how overengineered it actually turned out. Experimental would be a better term as it is using PydanticAI graphs library, which is in its very early stages as of writing this, although arguably already better than some of the pipeline libraries. Anyway, here is a link to it. It is a CLI poker app where you play one hand against an LLM. The LLM (theoretically) gets better with a self-correcting mechanism based on the evaluation score from another LLM. It uses the annotated past games as an additional context to potentially improve its decision-making. https://github.com/juho-y/archipylago-poker

Careful with externalTrafficPolicy

On a project I am working on is hosted in an EKS cluster with the NGINX ingress controller (the one maintained by Kubernetes). It is deployed using it's official official Helm chart, which I realized, after a lengthy debugging session, was a mistake. The initial setup I aimed to improve had several flaws. Firstly, we were using the AWS Classic Load Balancer in front of the nginx ingress in the cluster, which has been deprecated for some time (years?). Continuing to use it makes little sense to us. The second issue was that we were only running one(!) nginx pod, which is quite sketchy since the exposed web services had essentially no high availability. I switched to the Network Load Balancer (NLB), which was straightforward - I just needed to change the ingress-nginx service annotation to specify the load balancer type as NLB: service.beta.kubernetes.io/aws-load-balancer-type: nlb However, increasing the replica count turned out to be tricky. When I bumped it up to two, I began to ...

Koodihommia

Search This Blog