KayLeadfoot@fedia.io to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 2 days agoHope y'all are having a very NULL QA dayfedia.ioimagemessage-square14linkfedilinkarrow-up1776
arrow-up1776imageHope y'all are having a very NULL QA dayfedia.ioKayLeadfoot@fedia.io to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 2 days agomessage-square14linkfedilink
minus-squaretauren@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·22 hours agoI’d argue that the system shouldn’t automatically convert negative numbers to positive numbers. Instead, it should display an error to the user. Of course, that’s an abstract thought as I don’t know what was the system and who interacted with it.
minus-squarecsm10495@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·17 hours agoFor something end-user facing: I could understand this argument. In this case they were more or less just calling a C function that had an unsigned long long as the parameter they were setting negative. The whole ‘bug’ was that the other side of the function call was seeing a positive number no matter what. The real situation was a bit more complicated, but that’s the gist.
I’d argue that the system shouldn’t automatically convert negative numbers to positive numbers. Instead, it should display an error to the user. Of course, that’s an abstract thought as I don’t know what was the system and who interacted with it.
For something end-user facing: I could understand this argument.
In this case they were more or less just calling a C function that had an unsigned long long as the parameter they were setting negative.
The whole ‘bug’ was that the other side of the function call was seeing a positive number no matter what.
The real situation was a bit more complicated, but that’s the gist.