Code coverage is one of rare useful metrics that can measure your code. Yet, most of us get it completely wrong. Everyone knows that aiming for 100% coverage is crazy. So teams settle for some arbitrary figure they deem to be good enough. Most of teams aim for 80%, that's kind of an industry average. Excuse my party-breaking, but why? Why is it okay to have 20% of code untested? How do you decide which 20% not to cover? More often than not, it's the most complicated 20%, and most impactful 20%. For the better part of it, the 80% coverage is just a mantra. For some team, some time in the past, this figure made a lot of sense. But then it became one of those "best practices" that everyone follows, but nobody understands why anymore. The reason why it's okay not to test 20% of your code is not because it's your team's benchmark, but because that 20% of your code doesn't actually need testing. This session shows you how to structure your code in such a way that there is a very clear split between code that needs testing, and the code that you can safely omit from your unit tests. The end result is a much more robust, more testable code, and a good test coverage that is not just some meaningless number your team settled for.