4 ms·
Why play all these semantic games? You're saying it's the author's problem. You want them to even edit their readme to include warnings for would be production/
by ethanwillis 1y ago
Why play all these semantic games? You're saying it's the author's problem. You want them to even edit their readme to include warnings for would be production/business users who don't want to pay for it.
- layer8 1y agoGP is arguing about licences. Yes, formally there is no obligation, and I'm not saying the author has any such obligation. In the present case, either the missing overflow check in the code is by mistake, and then it's warranted to point out the error, or, as I understood GGGP to be arguing, the author deliberately decided to neglect safety or correctness, and then in my opinion you can't reject the criticism as unwarranted if the project's presentation isn't explicit about that. I'm not making anything the author's problem here. Rather, I'm defending my criticism of the code, and am giving arguments as to why it is generally good form to make it explicit if a project doesn't care about the code being safe and correct.
- stevepotter 1y agoI understand your point and if I were the author I would want either a disclaimer or a fix. File an issue or make a pr. Filing an issue is quicker and more fruitful than dealing with folks here
- president_zippy 1y ago[flagged]
- lixtra 1y agoLayer8 DID the thing though, skimmed through the code and thought about security issues.
- president_zippy 1y ago[dead]
- madeofpalk 1y agoIt is useful to understand the limitations of such hobby programs to know what they are useful for.