Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Is this basically "I'm doing the robustness principle but also communicating that I'm judging you"?



I love the concept.

At the firm I work at, one of my "10% time" projects was to build out a "warnings" field in the API response. There are often times that you want to say "this is not inherently wrong, but likely represents wrong assumptions upstream" or "you're asking for something that's obsolete and is now being silently ignored".

For example, if someone passes a currency field with the wrong number of decimal places. You might actually want to say your product costs $1.62346, but it's more likely you're not sanitizing your data and relying on non-guaranteed rounding behaviour to make it right.

The problem we have is that the most of the API fields are opt-in-- the people who could most use the warnings are unlikely to go in and activate them.


To be honest I think the robustness principle isn’t very well supported. We shouldn’t be this accommodating in what we accept. We’re very likely harming users by ignoring errors.


That said we should be much more accommodating in our user interfaces to help prevent this kind of crap data.


lol Pretty much! It cites the Robustness Principle.


That’s what I get for responding while eating dinner and not reading thoroughly lol




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: