Some colleagues have drawn my attention to this, from an MSDN article:

Although the idea of code coverage is simple enough, actually performing code coverage analysis in a non-.NET environment can be very time consuming, difficult, and expensive. (Source)

Ignoring for a moment whether the statement in the article is true, it’s pointless, because it sets up a comparison without describing what it’s comparing to. It’s a vacuous statement masquerading as a fact. This is the worst kind of writing.

There are several reasons this statement is valueless:

1. Even if performing code coverage analysis can be expensive, that doesn’t mean it must be expensive. Almost anything a person might do could be expensive, if done poorly enough.
2. Performing code coverage analysis can be relatively easy and cheap. I haven’t done it in a while, but the last time I set up a project with Maven I got code coverage analysis free of charge, and it only took me a half-day to learn and do. Not free, but relatively cheap, considering everything I get for my investment of a half day.
3. The author cites nothing to support this statement, making an opinion (debatable) look like a fact (not up for debate).
4. Later, the author writes “In the days before .NET, code coverage was one of the most frustrating parts of my job as a tester.” On which platforms? In which contexts? At least tell us a story to entertain us. Maybe you were an idiot back then and you’re smarter now, and your current self would have been able to easily perform code coverage on that project.

I could go on, but I believe you get the point.

Let me be clear: I don’t mean to say that one shouldn’t try to express one’s opinion in the best possible light; and I don’t mean to say that one ought not to promote one’s work. I do both. Still, when one writes, one needs to remember to separate opinion from fact and one needs to support one’s opinions with at least one concrete anecdote to give the reader an idea that one is not simply talking out of one’s ass. To do any less is to show an astounding lack of respect for one’s readers.