Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 1
    The reason is because one bug can breed other bugs, this happen because code is interlinked, so while tester feel good finding many bug sometimes they dont know that programmer just need to fix that one bug and poof all the other is gone. Commented Nov 15, 2016 at 16:00
  • 1
    I'll agree with @kirie here, that a bug in one piece of functionality usually has a cascade effect on other pieces of functionality. The tester may think they are distinct bugs, but they are really all sourced from the one problem. Additionally, humans are well designed to find patterns, which is why we do it in everything. Commented Nov 15, 2016 at 17:04
  • Very rarely I have a bug that may overwrite a random bit of information, anywhere. With that kind of bug in the source code, the software could misbehave in gazillions of possible ways. Commented Nov 15, 2016 at 22:24
  • 4
    I think this is a valid question and would not like to see it closed, as the OP specifiably asked for "concrete non-anecdotal data". However, the answers given so far are not providing this. I would rather see it protected and answers without links to research down voted. Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 1:02
  • @gnasher729 I do not know what overwrite bit of information you mention, but this is common when you use DRY principle on early stage when many function havent been fully tested yet already used many times. Commented Nov 16, 2016 at 4:58