> But given how much easier unit tests are to write now with AI I think the % of code worth unit testing has gone up.
I see the argument, I just disagree with it. Test code is still code and it still has to be maintained, which, sure "the AI will do that" but now theres a lot more that I have to babysit.
The tests that I'm seeing pumped out by my coworkers who are using AI for it just aren't very good tests a lot of the time, and honestly encode too much of the specific implementation details of the module in question into them, making refactoring more of a chore.
The tests I'm talking about simply aren't going to catch any bugs, they weren't used as an isolated execution environment for test driven development, so what use are they? I'm not convinced, not yet anyway.
Just because we can get "9X%" coverage with these tools, doesn't mean we should.
