[nonchalantsui]

There is a cost burden to not being 100% correct when it comes to programming. You simply have chosen to ignore that burden, but it still exists for others. Whether it's for example a percent of your users now getting stalled pages due to the webgl shader, or your lunch scraper ddosing local restaurants. They aren't actually forgiving regarding correctness.

Which is fine for actual testing you're doing internally, since that cost burden is then remedied by you fixing those issues. However, no feature is as free as you're making it sound, not even the "nice to have" additions that seem so insignificant.

[brulard]

I never said it's free. (But also aiming for 100% correctness is very very expensive) I'm talking about trading correctness, readability, security and maybe others for another metrics. What I said is just not every project that has value should be optimized for the same metrics. Bank or medical software needs to be correct as close to 100% as possible. Some tool I'm creating for my team to simplify a process does not necessarily need to. I would not mind my webgl shader possibly causing problems to some users. It would get reported and fixed. Or not. It's my call what I would spend my effort on.

Of course the tradeoffs should be well considered. That's why it may get out of hand real bad if software will be created (or vibe coded) by people with little understanding of these metrics and tradeoffs. I'm absolutely not advocating for that.