What is the name of this approach to development, testing and bug fixing?

Question

Software testing

I worked on a project where there were absolutely no tests, but there was also no blockage for bugs.
That's why I remembered and wanted to know if there is a name for the following approach:
All code is uploaded through a strict and thorough code review. On the dev server, it is only tested by hand, often small bugs get into production.
The bug fix is ​​organized in such a way that the client stumbles upon an error somewhere, the error is immediately reported to the Slack channel and stored in the database as unhandled. The error is parsed by the stack and environment variables that are attached to the error entry. Corrected and poured hot-fix.
The error itself, in fact, is a caught Exception, which is written to the database with all available information. If, for example, some abstract error has occurred, then when fixing, an exception is already set with a human name, and if suddenly, due to a change in some module, we again find ourselves in the same exceptional situation, we already get an absolutely exact name, by which it is clear what kind of error occurred and you can even remember where to look for it (although the file and line number is attached to the error, so you don’t have to remember).
The disadvantages are obvious - logical errors cannot be caught in this way, only at the request of the client. Well, of course, autotests would have provided for the error in advance.
Pluses - no time is wasted on tests, so features are sawn faster. More and more spontaneously, the project "makes mistakes more often", but it develops faster and adapts to the client, which is very important, especially in the face of fierce competition.
Is it just such a compromise way of developing a product with a bug fix with little bloodshed, or does this approach have a name and is, to some extent, a completely working alternative? I would like to learn more and read about this topic.
I found and read a couple of articles about static and dynamic code analysis and at first I thought that this was about my question. But as it turned out, the only similarity is that dynamic analysis also uses the working version of the program, and not the test, fictitious one.
Or maybe it's just too late, the brain is tired and trying to squeeze the important out of the unimportant - just a project without tests. What am I attached to and looking for something deep? Who knows...

Answer 1

old topic, but always relevant
, I don’t know about the name of the method, but I personally focus on careful planning, a coherent architecture, finding common solutions, well-structured code and reusing it for
a couple of years working on a project that has several similar modules, in the first I did not participate, and by the third module the number of production errors was reduced to two absolutely non-critical ones from more than two hundred in the first module
, in parallel, a universal system for building front-end applications was developed, which reduces development time from several months to a couple of weeks by one developer, plus generates documentation for each application
QA works like everyone else with tickets and our fixes, but the amount of testing is incomparably less, and the quality of production surprises even me

Answer 2

This is a perfectly normal development approach. In our company, this is called data-driven development.
The bottom line is that instead of tests, the entire project is densely covered with all sorts of different metrics. For example, purchases per minute, registrations per minute, button clicks in the end. All these metrics are displayed on charts. With the release of any new feature, we look at these charts and alerts.
If we see how something went down, then there is a bug, we roll it back, if everything is exactly the same, then there are either no bugs, or they are not significant and do not affect the user experience in any way.