No: I wasn't trying to refute what you wrote. I was pointing out to the reader that though you were arguing that test cases are no replacement for proofs, and were right to argue that, the bugs that test cases catch may overlap with the bugs that a proof will catch, but the former set is not a subset of the latter set.
Comments
After that whole thing I wrote, do you really think that's my opinion?
No: I wasn't trying to refute what you wrote. I was pointing out to the reader that though you were arguing that test cases are no replacement for proofs, and were right to argue that, the bugs that test cases catch may overlap with the bugs that a proof will catch, but the former set is not a subset of the latter set.
If I offended your sensibilities, my apologies.