Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> writes:
> If the state has been "well defined", then please point us to the
> definition of it, or to the tests that confirm it works as defined. If
> you can't, then the state has not been "well defined". All we can say
> is it has been "unchanged" over a long period of time.
Okay, the term 'well defined' might be not fully applicable here. But in the
meanwhile, if we are looking for a proper term, saying that it's 'unchanged'
is not enough as well.
We had this unchanged state for many years and releases, and it wasn't causing
practical problems for the users. The callers were relying on that behavior,
and changing it caused several problems. On the contrary, I think that the
r1572363 + r1573111 change we're talking about is 'undefined'. Using the
same logic, could you please point to the tests that specify the behavior
after this change?
My point is that even if state A is not 'well defined', it's still better than
the current 'undefined' state. It has been there for years, it wasn't causing
problems, it had a reasoning behind it , and the callers were used to it.
Received on 2015-10-29 17:13:33 CET