Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Related Rants
"Most memorable bug you fixed?"
A recent instance happened in one of my Scratch projects, and the bug involved "Infinities."
I had an opportunity to teach kids programming, and it involved Scratch. So, to have something to show those kids at least, I decided to make a small game.
In that game, I had an object that takes some time before appearing after being cloned (i.e., instantiated.) The duration was calculated by dividing a constant with a variable:
[Wait for ((3) / (variable)) seconds]
The bug is that I forgot about the case where 'variable' can be 0, which is classic and insignificant.
Well, the thing is that I learned two things the hard way:
1: Scratch is very flexible about integers and floats (e.g., at one second, it looks like an integer, but one operation later, it's a float.)
2: Scratch does not provide any 'runtime errors' that can crash the project.
In other languages, similar "wait" methods take "milliseconds" in an integer, so it would have barfed out a "DivideByZeroException" or something. But Scratch was so robust against project-crashing behavior that it literally waited for f*<king "infinity seconds," effectively hanging that clone without warning or runtime errors. This masked my bug. It took way too long to debug that s#!+.
Don't blanket-mask any errors.
rant
scratch
wk321