Timeline for Should minor broken code be reviewed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2015 at 20:40 | comment | added | Simon Forsberg Mod | @cpicanco It's rarely possible to test code to 100% and be 100% confident that it works. It's often bound to be an edge-case somewhere. That is why we allow the "unaware of the brokenness" case. Reviewing code that has a little edge-case that doesn't work is often more helpful than closing the code for being broken. If you want to have a long discussion about this then you should consider taking it to chat, or you might want to lookup previous meta questions about the subject, or start a new meta question. | |
| Nov 26, 2015 at 20:29 | comment | added | cpicanco | Sorry, by I am not sure how to conciliate the binary approach (broken/not broaken) with the "unaware of the brokenness" rule. Could you extend the discussion a little bit about it? | |
| Nov 26, 2015 at 20:25 | vote | accept | cpicanco | ||
| Nov 26, 2015 at 20:24 | history | edited | 200_successMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 44 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2015 at 20:18 | history | answered | 200_successMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |