This isn’t Gunnar’s fault. The problem was whomever stored ordered data in a hash file.
I have been in this business for decades and I have run into the situation where changing the shape of memory uncovers bugs. Every time it causes many hours and days of debugging.
If programming weren’t hard, they wouldn’t need us to do it. (I’m not sure how much longer that phrase will hold up under large language models.)
> This isn’t Gunnar’s fault. The problem was whomever stored ordered data in a hash file.
Yes. Even if it were, I don't think it needs to be mentioned in the commit message. Gunnar improved something, which triggered problems with old broken code. For his efforts he gets:
> Gunnar, I like you, but please don't make me go through this again. :^)
If the smiley face and the commit message's tone didn't make it clear that it's
a joke, TFA explicitly ends with this:
> Gunnar in particular was the one who uncovered this bug, and despite my
satirical jab in the commit message helped uncover this very interesting bug,
so he’s the one who made this post possible.
Gunnar is also credited right in the same commit message for help:
> Credits to Andrew Kaster, bgianf, CxByte and Gunnar for the debugging help.
And judging from how the author of the actually broken code in question is
(reasonably) not investigated or publicized, it seems quite obvious to me that
the article's author is not trying to play the blame game.
I have been in this business for decades and I have run into the situation where changing the shape of memory uncovers bugs. Every time it causes many hours and days of debugging.
If programming weren’t hard, they wouldn’t need us to do it. (I’m not sure how much longer that phrase will hold up under large language models.)