What is the current state of the law on "reasonable tactical decisions" in the context of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel?

"Reviewing courts defer to counsel's reasonable tactical decisions in examining a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel [citation], and there is a 'strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.' [Citation]. '[W]e accord great deference to counsel's tactical decisions' [citation], and we have explained that 'courts should not second guess reasonable, if difficult, tactical decisions in the harsh light of hindsight.' [Citation.] 'Tactical errors are generally not deemed reversible, and counsel's decision making must be evaluated in the context of available facts.'" (People v. Weaver (2001) 26 Cal. 4th 876, 925-926.) "No particular set of detailed rules for counsel's conduct can satisfactorily take account of the variety of circumstances faced by defense counsel or the range of legitimate decisions regarding how best to represent a criminal defendant. Any such set of rules would interfere with the constitutionally protected independence of counsel and restrict the wide latitude counsel must have in making tactical decisions." (Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 688-689.)