Re: policy around 'wontfix' bug tag
On 2018-02-05 08:12:21 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 02:07:47PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2018-02-04 08:22:23 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:48:45AM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> > > > In which case, it should refuse to accept '4/2/2018' at all, right?
> > >
> > > It can't, that would break working scripts. This is the heart of the
> > > problem: we know the parser is horrible, confusing, and irregular, but any
> > > attempt to change it will break lots of stuff that depends on the current
> > > brokenness.
> >
> > It is not rare that the behavior of utilities change and break
> > scripts. So, why not here, in particular for a good reason?
> >
> It is equally common, perhaps even more so, that buggy behavior is
> retained (especially if it is not harmful) and that "correct" behavior
> require a switch or setting. I am not personally affected by this, as
> far as I know, but as a software developer I can certainly understand
> wanting to retain backward compatibility, even when it is buggy.
It might be harmful because one silently gets a wrong date.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: