It's defining the term "code coverage" to be the ratio of lines covered by tests to the total lines.
> why did they suspect this would be indicative of anything?
If anything, it's a useful feedback mechanism. e.g. "Gee, we wrote sixteen unit tests for this module but we're still only at 34% coverage. Ohh, I see it now -- framistan.cpp doesn't get used by these tests at all. We should write a test that enables framistan mode!"
It's defining the term "code coverage" to be the ratio of lines covered by tests to the total lines.
> why did they suspect this would be indicative of anything?
If anything, it's a useful feedback mechanism. e.g. "Gee, we wrote sixteen unit tests for this module but we're still only at 34% coverage. Ohh, I see it now -- framistan.cpp doesn't get used by these tests at all. We should write a test that enables framistan mode!"