KayLeadfoot@fedia.io to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 months agoHope y'all are having a very NULL QA dayfedia.ioimagemessage-square7linkfedilinkarrow-up113arrow-down10
arrow-up113arrow-down1imageHope y'all are having a very NULL QA dayfedia.ioKayLeadfoot@fedia.io to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 months agomessage-square7linkfedilink
minus-squarecsm10495@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-23 months agoI once had a QA engineer file a bug saying they couldn’t do negative testing since negative numbers were converted to positive. The function took an unsigned integer. Took a lot of explaining to get them to understand that negative testing isn’t necessarily negative numbers.
minus-squaretauren@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 months 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-squareIron Lynx@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·3 months agoHe asked for -1 beers. He got interpreted as 264 - 1 beers (assuming 64-bit unsigned integers)
I once had a QA engineer file a bug saying they couldn’t do negative testing since negative numbers were converted to positive.
The function took an unsigned integer. Took a lot of explaining to get them to understand that negative testing isn’t necessarily negative numbers.
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.
He asked for -1 beers. He got interpreted as 264 - 1 beers (assuming 64-bit unsigned integers)