Adding functionality would be a feature request, not a bug report.

The following test suite provides 100% code and feature coverage:

use Test;
BEGIN { plan tests => 1 }

do '/dev/null';
ok( ! $@ ); # Empty text compiles w/o error

# Test all features:
[download]

So, if you send an empty file to your next client, and he responds with "this program actually doesn't do as we agreed on", you charge him because he wants additional features?

No, of course it would not be an "additional feature" request. It would be an original feature request. "This code doesn't have feature $X" is not the same as "This code is buggy". Failing to implement required features makes the code incomplete. It doesn't mean the code contains any bugs.

Code being bug-free obviously does not mean that there are no features that it leaves unsatisfied.

But the empty program successfully implements the following important features:

1. Compiles without errors
2. Validates all required inputs
3. Reproduces itself
4. Does not allow any SQL injection attacks
5. Produces all output in UTF-16
6. Produces all output in 7-bit ASCII
7. Produces all output in Big5
8. Logs detailed error reports if any operation it attempts fails
9. Exits immediately if used as part of any illegal or immoral activity
10. All output is automatically translated into the viewer's native language, even if there are multiple simultaneous viewers
11. All network communication is encrypted so that not only can the NSA never decrypt a single byte of it, they can't even detect it

- tye