{
  "@context":[
    "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
    {"Hashtag":"as:Hashtag"}
  ],
  "published":"2022-11-20T22:30:04.988Z",
  "attributedTo":"https://gopinath.org/actors/rahul",
  "to":["https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"],
  "cc":["https://gopinath.org/actors/rahul/followers"],
  "content":"<p>/<a href=\"https://a.gup.pe/u/seresearchers\">@seresearchers</a> <a href=\"https://scholar.social/tags/seresearchers\">#seresearchers</a> <a href=\"https://scholar.social/tags/ComputerScience\">#ComputerScience</a> <a href=\"https://gopinath.org/tags/softwaretesting\" class=\"hashtag\" rel=\"tag\">#softwaretesting</a> <a href=\"https://gopinath.org/tags/typetheory\" class=\"hashtag\" rel=\"tag\">#typetheory</a></p><p>For the type theory folks out there, when contrasting between writing unit tests and providing type annotations, is there some thing in type annotations and type checking that correspond to <em>coverage</em>? and more specifically <a href=\"http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~chechik/courses18/csc410/p366-zhu.pdf\"><em>coverage adequacy</em></a>?</p>",
  "mediaType":"text/html",
  "attachment":[],
  "tag":[
      {"type":"Hashtag","name":"#softwaretesting","href":"https://gopinath.org/tags/softwaretesting"},
      {"type":"Hashtag","name":"#typetheory","href":"https://gopinath.org/tags/typetheory"}
  ],
  "type":"Note",
  "id":"https://gopinath.org/objects/fs78k8RrpEM"
}