Confusion over Korean
-
Maybe not really WTF but just what happend.
So I was finally slacking off, reading some stuff and this guy comes up to me.
"This button removes all the previous file attachments and it should only allow three files but this record has 7. It shouldn't do that. Fix it please"
Huh? I never heard of this 3 attachments limit before? Someone must have implemented it.
Yeah I don't know who did it. Anyway, fix this please.
I'll have a look.Simply looking through SVN history, one person is found.
Errm, did you use this .empty() method here? That guy says it shouldn't.
Oh yeah I did that. Let's see... Oh this code should go into a different function. I'll fix that.
(Confused) Okay.So why did this person use node.empty() (Javascript) in the first place and why did that guy ask me to do it?
I decided to let the guy know what the problem was and how this is being fixed now. You know, ordinary update/headsup. So what's the problem?
Err, you told me to fix it. But someone actually put a note.empty() there. It wasn't a bug. Someone actually did it. And that person said she would fix it. Just giving you headsup.
(Comes in) Yeah my mistake. I fixed it and I'll commit it.
Why is she doing that? I asked you. Is there a problem?
Err, I though you were saying it was a bug? So I looked and there literally was a line that goes node.empty(). So I didn't know what was going on. And I asked the person who did it and we talked and she fixed it. I'm just letting you know how things are progressing.
Well yeah I knew someone did it. That's why I asked you to do it.
Err, was it particularly difficult?(These people have less experience than I. So I was just asking if this was tricky to them)
No, everyone has something to do and we are all making this together so I asked you. What's the problem?Well, yeah I get that. I didn't have anything to do but I'm here as a contractor and I delivered my part last week. That wasn't a bug and someone actually modified it so that it would delete all the input fields which I had no idea.
All this conversation was carried out in Korean and I found it very confusing.
I kept saying "Yes I know but someone(this person) actually wrote code that removed all the fields. It wasn't a bug and she said she would fix it and she did it and I'm just letting you know".
That guy kept saying "Yeah I know, but I asked you to do it because we are all doing this together. It's not like whoever modified that file's fault."
Me: "No I'm not saying it's anyone's fault. I just didn't know what was going on because you said it shouldn't behave like that but someone actually wrote code that does that. Anyway, this is fixed now and I was just giving you headsup."
That guy: "So what's the problem?"
Me: (I give up communicating with this guy in his(and my) native language)
-
In C++, empty returns true if the size is zero.
-
Sorry. I should have made it clearer. That was JQuery selector.empty() that removed all the input fields within.
-
Now you're challenging your senior's command authority. And he won't like it.
While it's usually correct that "the person break it is responsible to fix it", the team lead or whoever in charge of the project can delegate the task of fixing to any member in team, especially when the "responsible person" is already having huge burden of tasks, or is under complex task that requires high level of concentration so the team lead don't want to disturb him.
In any case, except your workload is also overloaded and you know someone else is free, you should just proceed to fix it yourself. (You can ask the responsible person for reason/background of the offending code change, though)
Of course if he's not your direct supervisor, you can report to your supervisor under the name of "chain of command" and see if you should own the task of fixing the bug. (Many supervisors don't like their team members being tasked by others directly, therefore bypassing them, too)
-
Now you're challenging your senior's command authority. And he won't like it.
No, I'm not. I just didn't know what was going on because I didn't touch that part and suddenly someone says things aren't working. I simply asked the person who touched it because I didn't know if it was the intended behaviour.
Why would one guy say it shouldn't work like that and another guy write code that does it?
So I suspected some confusion over what the interface should do over different members since this type of confusion arose many times before.I was simply checking. However, the person who modified it told me she would just fix it. So I said okay.
To give more insight into this, she just misplaced a line of code in a completely different javascript function.
Also, I asked her if, then moving that line would do the job, which is a very simple task.Then I just wanted let the guy who brought this up first know how this is being done.
-
It could be simply your tone or body language. It may have sound as though you are challenging the guy for blame.
On the other hand, that guy sounds like "So the bug isn't actually a bug and is someone needs to be blamed and that person is not going to be me".This is kind of common in big Asian corporations, where a lot of effort is spent on finding someone to blame for the problem, rather than addressing the problem.
-
This is kind of common in big Asian corporations, where a lot of effort is spent on finding someone to blame for the problem, rather than addressing the problem.
While I don't think this was a case of find someone to blame, the wonderful and rich culture of Asia is the reason why usually yield all the glory to those who deem it reasonable.
-
It wasn't a bug.
Oh yeah I did that. Let's see... Oh this code should go into a different function. I'll fix that.
I don't see where you got one from the other.
-
I never said it was culture, just how office politics are being played out in most big Asian corporations.
My home country's civil servants love to take pride in being "efficient" but when something goes wrong, the action taken to remedy a simple issue like a broken air-conditioning in a room can take up to 2 weeks, as they need to spend more than a week on finding a person to put the blame on and then call up the service personnel.
-
lol yeah I guess you're right.
-
I think it's not an Asian specific problem. When the team lead assign you with something, you're not expected to reject it unless you have a very good reason. Simply because you're not the one previously changed the code is not one of them (those "very good reason", what if it's changed by someone who have left the company?).
-
Then I just wanted let the guy who brought this up first know how this is being done.
And now you have learned never to volunteer any information to this person and to confine yourself instead to "it's fixed / it's not fixed yet" responses to direct questions.
People who get weird when you try to be helpful to them are not worth trying to help.
-
I think it's not an Asian specific problem. When the team lead assign you with something, you're not expected to reject it unless you have a very good reason. Simply because you're not the one previously changed the code is not one of them (those "very good reason", what if it's changed by someone who have left the company?).
This seemed to be: in the process of research for the bug, the person who introduced the "issue" was asked about the purpose of the change, they realised what the problem was and offered to fix it.
-
In that case, he should emphasize that
offered to fix the bug herself, not switching reply as if he is trying to find a reason for not need to do that himself.Since he said that he has more experience than those people, maybe in
's eyes he "relayed" the task to .
-
In that case, he should emphasize that
offered to fix the bug herself, not switching reply as if he is trying to find a reason for not need to do that himself.At that point, I think I would have said something like, "Yes, you asked me and I've made sure that it's fixed. I got it fixed. It is fixed." No need to get into the details of your delegation.
-
-
Some people on this forum use "bug" to mean something different than I think "bug" means. I don't get it either. Because saying it's not a bug because the code was written to do that when the customer believes it's wrong behavior doesn't make sense to me.
The bug is that the behavior is wrong. It doesn't matter if it's wrong because there's a line of code that makes it wrong, or if it's wrong because the application crashed before it worked, or if it's wrong because alien moose from Jupiter stomped all over the server before that page loaded. The bug is that it's wrong.
-
At that point, I think I would have said something like, "Yes, you asked me and I've made sure that it's fixed. I got it fixed. It is fixed." No need to get into the details of your delegation.
Right and if that doesn't work, you need to get all three people in the same room at the same time and talk it out.
Also drop some subtle hints that all three of these people's time is valuable, and man you're sure wasting a lot of it straightening out this non-issue, huh?
-
Meh. I'd just stop responding rather than drag the silliness out. I'm not even sure what the other guy is trying to say.
-
Some people on this forumEverybody in the world uses "bug" to meansomething different than I think "bug" meansthe right thing, that is, unintentional behavior, unlike me, who made up my own definition, which is "something @blakeyrat doesn't agree with".FTFY.
-
The bug is that the behavior is wrong.
Most people can distinguish between "doesn't work the way the user wants" and "doesn't work the way it was designed to" because sometimes there's a reason to. In fact, if what the user wants makes more sense than what it's doing now, then it might be good to change. But one of the great things about English is having different terms to describe different situations. Why are you so intent on using Newspeak and shrinking down the richness of English?
-
If my research is correct, the joke "It's not a bug, it's a feature" is already older than I am myself. So apparently, it has been common knowledge a long time already that a "bug" is anything that the user thinks is wrong, and that "The software works the way it is designed to" isn't an excuse for not calling something a "bug".
-
-
Basing this conclusion on a joke is not a very stable logical foundation.
-
That guy: "So what's the problem?"
Me: (I give up communicating with this guy in his(and my) native language)
Good to know that people can be absolutely brain damaged in any country and any language. I have dealt with this kind of crap before, and then I have moved on to better companies. People are idiots.
-
"unexpected result"
"mistakes (..) in (..) its design"
Seems like it covers exactly what blakeyrat and I said.
-
Expected by who, though? Blakey thinks "it doesn't do what I, the end user, wants" is a bug. That's not how the word is normally used.
But go ahead, use your special snowflake meaning of it. Just don't be surprised when everyone misunderstands you when the program works the way it was intended, but not the way you think it should work.
-
Just look at the opening post. Someone complains about a bug, but rather than just getting the bug fixed, the OP tries to explain that technically it is not a 'bug' according to his (and your) definition, but fails to communicate that standpoint, because this hair-splitting between sloppiness and erroneously introduced 'functionality' is irrelevant for 'everyone'.
-
Expected by who, though? Blakey thinks "it doesn't do what I, the end user, wants" is a bug.
To the exclusion of everyone else, including other end users. That bit is important, and not completely clear in your wording (even though I'm pretty sure that's what you meant).
-
Well, I've mentioned it enough times in the past I didn't want to bother this time. Didn't work, though.
-
or to behave in unintended ways.
From a user perspective, surprising behavior is a bug.
-
This seemed to be: in the process of research for the bug, the person who introduced the "issue" was asked about the purpose of the change, they realised what the problem was and offered to fix it.
Exactly. I did not reject an assignment.
I just wanted to know why that-person-who-wrote-code-to-remove-elements did it. I thought there must have been some reason, some requests, etc. It turned out to be a simple(?) mistake and she realised it and volunteered to fix(move the misplaced line of code).
I even made sure it wasn't too much work by asking her if simply moving the line of code to the right place would do the job, to which she replied, "Yes".
-
Good to know that people can be absolutely brain damaged in any country and any language.
Also good to know I'm not the only one.
People are idiots.
Most precise. We all are.
-
I was not implying you were the idiot. I was stating the person you were speaking with, who refused to understand you, was the idiot. I maintain that assertion. I don't think you did anything wrong.
-
I was not implying you were the idiot. I was stating the person you were speaking with, who refused to understand you, was the idiot. I maintain that assertion. I don't think you did anything wrong.
Nuh I'm not saying you are implying anything either. Relax
. I'm simply referring to human nature.
-
if it's wrong because alien moose from Jupiter stomped all over the server before that page loaded
In 2016, provisioning servers without Jovian alien moose protection is just lazy.
Software bug - Wikipedia
