zlacker

>>orph+(OP)
How well can copilot write unit tests? This seems like an area where it could be really useful and actually improve software development practices.

>>Spinna+ad
Writing tests for the sake of coverage is already practically useless which is what a lot of orgs do, This could maybe generate such tests. However it doesn't materially impact quality now, so not much difference if automated.

One of the main value props for writing meaningful unit tests, is it helps the developer think differently about the code he is writing tests for, and that improves quality of the code composition.

>>manque+Qe
I've found that for large codebases of dynamic typed interpreted languages Test Coverage is very useful at preventing typos or subtle bugs that wouldn't be caught otherwise.