korrents

On the map

Tap a claim on the ring to put it at the centre.

← Comparing code coverage between passing and failing test runs is a cheap, effective way to localize a bug quickly.

12 connected korrents · 11 moments on record from 17 Apr 2012 to 16 Sept 2026.

Everything filed under coding agents coding agents Everything filed under vibe coding vibe coding Everything filed under software quality software quality Everything filed under code generation code generation Same subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subjectSame subject Read this korrent: Comparing code coverage between passing and failing test runs is a cheap, effective way to localize a bug quickly. Comparing code coverage between passingand failing test runs is a cheap,effective way to localize a bug quickly. Last stated a year ago 25 Apr 2025 RC Russ Cox — holds since 2025-04-25 — tap for who they are Same subject: Test coverage is a tool for finding untested code and says nothing about how good the tests are. — tap to centre the map on it Test coverage is a tool for findinguntested code and says nothing abouthow good the tests are. Last stated 14 years ago 17 Apr 2012 MF Martin Fowler — holds since 2012-04-17 — tap for who they are Same subject: Buggy code usually causes outright test failures rather than being silently exercised inside tests that still pass. — tap to centre the map on it Buggy code usually causes outrighttest failures rather than beingsilently exercised inside tests thatstill pass. Last stated a year ago 25 Apr 2025 RC Russ Cox — holds since 2025-04-25 — tap for who they are Same subject: Almost every software project has cheap testing wins left on the table: basic random testing, static analysis and fault injection pay for themselves the first time they are run. — tap to centre the map on it Almost every software project hascheap testing wins left on thetable: basic random testing, staticanalysis and fault injection pay forthemselves the first time they arerun. Last stated 11 years ago 12 Dec 2015 DL Dan Luu — holds since 2015-12-12 — tap for who they are Same subject: A coding agent does not learn from its mistakes the way a person does -- it repeats the same error indefinitely unless a human notices and writes it down. — tap to centre the map on it A coding agent does not learn fromits mistakes the way a person does-- it repeats the same errorindefinitely unless a human noticesand writes it down. Last stated 6 months ago 25 Mar 2026 MZ Mario Zechner — holds since 2026-03-25 — tap for who they are Same subject: A coding-agent company should not train its own model: it has to stay neutral ground for models to compete on. — tap to centre the map on it A coding-agent company should nottrain its own model: it has to stayneutral ground for models to competeon. Last stated 3 weeks ago 3 Sept 2026 DR Dax Raad — holds since 2026-09-03 — tap for who they are Same subject: A company on a monolith cannot use AI on it: no model in the next eighteen months will hold that codebase, so the monolith has to be broken up or rewritten. — tap to centre the map on it A company on a monolith cannot useAI on it: no model in the nexteighteen months will hold thatcodebase, so the monolith has to bebroken up or rewritten. Last stated 6 months ago 11 Mar 2026 SY Steve Yegge — holds since 2026-03-11 — tap for who they are Same subject: A person at maximum vibe-coding speed has about three productive hours a day, and a company that will not let them stop there is going to break. — tap to centre the map on it A person at maximum vibe-codingspeed has about three productivehours a day, and a company that willnot let them stop there is going tobreak. Last stated 6 months ago 11 Mar 2026 SY Steve Yegge — holds since 2026-03-11 — tap for who they are Same subject: A sense of achievement in software survives writing almost none of the code yourself. — tap to centre the map on it A sense of achievement in softwaresurvives writing almost none of thecode yourself. Last stated 4 weeks ago 26 Aug 2026 DH David Heinemeier Hansson — holds since 2026-08-26 — tap for who they are Same subject: A team can stop reading the code it ships, but only by first working out how its agents are to prove that what they wrote actually works. — tap to centre the map on it A team can stop reading the code itships, but only by first working outhow its agents are to prove thatwhat they wrote actually works. Last stated 6 months ago 19 Mar 2026 SW Simon Willison — holds since 2026-03-19 — tap for who they are Same subject: A model can now port essentially any codebase from one programming language to another, work that used to take a team over a year. — tap to centre the map on it A model can now port essentially anycodebase from one programminglanguage to another, work that usedto take a team over a year. Last stated 2 months ago 27 Jul 2026 BC Boris Cherny — holds since 2026-07-27 — tap for who they are Same subject: Agent-generated pull requests have exploded in size with no signs of slowing down — tap to centre the map on it Agent-generated pull requests haveexploded in size with no signs ofslowing down Last stated 5 days ago 16 Sept 2026 GO Gergely Orosz — holds since 2026-09-16 — tap for who they are Same subject: Agents are the new compilers that compile intent into fast software. — tap to centre the map on it Agents are the new compilers thatcompile intent into fast software. Last stated a week ago 12 Sept 2026 GR Guillermo Rauch — holds since 2026-09-12 — tap for who they are
same subject or similar wordinga cloud: claims about one subject, named for itbar: when it was last stated, on a scale from 2012 to today (stretched back to the oldest claim here) — full is todaya face: someone on record holding the claim — tap it for who they are

At the centre Comparing code coverage between passing and failing test runs is a cheap, effective way to localize a bug quickly. Last stated 25 Apr 2025 · a year ago Holds Russ Cox Read this korrent →