docs: Coverage-Untergrenze als zweiter Fall in why-gates-are-code.md (#10)

Files changed: - docs/why-gates-are-code.md
2026-09-04 19:20:35 +02:00
parent e00eae08e8
commit b4e450108e
1 changed files with 9 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -55,3 +55,12 @@ to feel routine.
 That's the deeper reason these numbers live in a tool rather than in prose: prose is read once
 and remembered loosely, but a threshold enforced every call is tested by every call, and a
 threshold that fails its own test gets noticed and re-measured rather than quietly ignored.
 The suite's coverage floor is the same argument run forwards instead of backwards. The ceiling
 above was wrong first and measured afterwards; the floor was withheld on purpose until the number
 existed - measured, then watched across 38 runs while the code grew by a quarter, and only then
 written down as 85 against an observed 87.0%. The two points of daylight are the same
 consideration as the ceiling's headroom: a limit the ordinary case keeps tripping stops being a
 limit. A coverage floor set at the measured number goes red on the next thin command wrapper,
 which is not a regression, and a threshold that goes red for a non-reason gets lowered rather
 than earned - the failure mode above, reached from the other direction.