> I looked at a pre-AI project I did a couple of years ago: test to code LOC was 0.15:1. The projects I work on now are around 1.3:1.

Lines of code is a poor metric for measuring, both for application code and testing code

▲

bluGill an hour ago | parent [-]

While in general that is true, this is one person and so we can assume a lot of the variables that make it a poor metric are constant in this case and so we can draw a few conclusions.

▲

OGWhales an hour ago | parent | next [-]

From my own experience, LLM generated code having more test cases is neither surprising nor an indication of improved quality. I've found LLMs are quite good at making lots of test but the tests are often not that useful. I would argue that total count remains a poor metric for quality.

	▲	bluGill 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I don't know of a good metric for quality. Total count of tests is the best I've found, but I agree it is bad.

▲

topaz0 42 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

We can conclude that there are more tests per code perhaps. We can't conclude they're adding value.

	▲	bluGill 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		my experience is 25% of valuable. Which is a lot better than nothing.