On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 21/07/2014 15:27, Grant Edwards wrote: >> >> On 2014-07-21, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> You call it a bug because you can't think of any way it could be >>> beneficial. That's the wrong way of looking at it. Something isn't a >>> bug because you find it annoying; it's a bug because it fails to >>> implement the programmer's intentions and/or the docs/specification. >> >> >> I was always taught that it's a "bug" is when a program doesn't do >> what a reasonable user expects -- that it's got nothing to do with the >> programmer's intent. >> > > As in my entire career I've never come across a "reasonable user" then by > that definition there are no bugs.
Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. It may be that there is a single platinum "reasonable user", kept at the International Bureau of Bugs, that we may all look on it and know what the SI Standard User is. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
