Comment by JKCalhoun

That's fine. Myself I have little use for them, I prefer functional testing. (Also, before unit tests we leaned on parameter checking in the live code — a kind of always-on unit test I guess).

Management though use the "percent coverage by unit tests" as some sort of safe/buggy software metric.

Management at one team I worked on was pushing for minimal 95% coverage with unit tests. I thought it was odd that they were so singularly focused on this issue. The impression I had was a that they felt that if you have full code coverage with unit tests, and the test pass — you can lay off the QA team because you are assured that you are shipping perfect software.