Test Coverage IS important...
This fellow said:
"I would much rather aim for 100% test-driven development than aim for 100% test coverage."
But I fear he's missing the point. If I'm only testing 1% of my code paths, 100% of the time, what am I accomplishing? Squat.
As my boss has said, adding a non-intrusive code coverage tool to an already successful unit-testing strategy can absolutely find gaps in coverage that staring at the screen just won't find.
But juxtaposing 100% TDD with a 100% coverage goal doesn't make sense. They are complimentary, parallel even, but not opposing goals.