I see your point about coverage volume being a better-fitted proxy for suite size. It&#x27;d also be a proxy for path coverage. Still, it&#x27;d be fun to count the horse&#x27;s teeth anyhow.<p>Would you say that coverage&#x27;s worth as a <i>negative</i> metric still seems meaningful, at least as a heuristic? I imagine that&#x27;s covered in other literature.<p>Where I work we don&#x27;t really fuss too much about coverage. We TDD, so in practice our coverage hovers around the high 90s as a matter of course. When I am writing a test I often manually mutate the code and test once it goes green as a quick validation that the test does what I think it does.<p>One last question -- did you classify tests? Feature, integration and unit tests should show quite different curves. Especially heavily mockist style unit tests.