• SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    This wouldn’t pass PR review and automated tests, unless they were a senior dev and used elevated privileges to mess with things behind the scenes.

    • maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      176
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s bold to assume those exist. Maybe there’s a reason the coworker left

        • maynarkh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          SVN has legit use cases still though. Git LFS is not or just barely supported in a lot of industries.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      113
      ·
      9 months ago

      rand() will be infrequent < 10 (at least ten in 2^15 times, if not exponentially more), so automated tests are likely to pass. If they don’t, they’re likely to pass on the second try, and then everyone shrugs and continues. If it’s buried in 500 other lines, then it’s likely the code reviewer will give it all a quick scan and say “it’s fine”. It’s the three line diffs that get lots of scrutiny.

      In other words, you seem to have a lot more faith in the process than I do.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          If it’s a 16-bit integer platform, it might hit every once in a while.

          If it’s a 32-bit integer platform, it’ll hit very rarely.

          If it’s a 64-bit integer platform, someone would have to do the math with some reasonable assumptions, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it would never hit before the universe becomes nothing but black holes.

          • Morphit @feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            9 months ago

            The point being made is that it also depends how often the ‘true’ value gets used in the code. Tests might only evaluate it a few times per run, or they could cause billions of evaluations per run. You can’t know the probability of a test failure without knowing the occurrence rate of that expression.

            • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Yes you’re correct, this was the point I was making.

              To elaborate: could be 100s of times in a codebase, even 1000s, being executed in tests on local machines and build servers 100s of times a day, etc. etc.

              • themusicman@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                But it would hit a different place every time… Most developers wouldn’t even consider checking for this, and the chance of getting a repro in a debugger is slim to none

    • steal_your_face@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Write a 5 line PR and receive 5 comments. Write a 500 line PR and receive no comments.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah but even a single automated test would catch it and reject the PR. You just need a single test.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          9 months ago

          No, you can’t assume that. The probability of hitting the condition each time is low. If there aren’t very many calls that hit this, it could easily slip through. Especially on 64-bit int platforms.

          • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yes agree if you’re talking about unit tests. I’m thinking smoke tests, which is are the most common automated tests in games, where I’ve spent most of professional career. The amount of booleans checks that happen in a single frame I doubt the game wouldn’t crash within the first couple seconds.