I wasn't sure if I was going to respond, but your sig made it mandatory.
First, the original topic. If your system doesn't handle boundary (or out-of-bounds) conditions properly, why don't you want to know that? You mention web-pages, which makes it even more important. If your CGI code can't handle these conditions, you may be subject to a DOS attack or other hack that may compromise your data (either exposing it or destroying it - either one is bad). Give me that "not right" QA tester any day of the week over one who has implicit assumptions built in that prevents them from bothering to test these scenarios!
Second, the sig. I hope that was something that Bruce said in jest, although according to his own site, it doesn't seem so. Most of his points seem good, but you've picked out the least sound of it. It's sort of like saying that this year, more WinXP machines will crash without warning than Win3.1 machines. That's not an indicator of risk, that's a statement of exposure.
In reply to Re^3: Dealing with the QA guy ... (no, really)
by Tanktalus
in thread Dealing with the QA guy ... (no, really)
by Tanktalus
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |