<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hypothesis on Daffa Abhipraya</title><link>https://blog.abhipraya.dev/tags/hypothesis/</link><description>Recent content in Hypothesis on Daffa Abhipraya</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><copyright>© Daffa Abhipraya</copyright><lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.abhipraya.dev/tags/hypothesis/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>PPL: Beyond Unit Tests [Sprint 2, Week 1]</title><link>https://blog.abhipraya.dev/ppl/part-b/s2w1-tdd/</link><pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0700</pubDate><guid>https://blog.abhipraya.dev/ppl/part-b/s2w1-tdd/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="what-i-worked-on">
 &lt;a class="anchor" href="#what-i-worked-on" data-anchor="what-i-worked-on" aria-hidden="true">#&lt;/a>
 What I Worked On
&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>This week I pushed our testing strategy well beyond standard unit tests. The project already had 433 backend and 200 frontend tests with 91% line coverage, but I wanted to answer a harder question: &lt;strong>do our tests actually catch bugs, or do they just execute code?&lt;/strong>&lt;/p>
&lt;p>I added four advanced testing approaches: property-based testing (Hypothesis + fast-check), behavioral testing (pytest-bdd with Gherkin), mutation testing (mutmut + Stryker), and test isolation verification (pytest-randomly). The results were eye-opening.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>