I work at a software company. We use the term "Working as Designed" when a client/user reports an issue that is not really a bug but is an issue that was not accounted for in the original programming. We are looking for a better term. "Working as Designed" may imply that we intended the behavior. "Not implemented" may be a better term but is very programmer centric. Does anyone have any other ideas? Thanks!

  • If it wasn't in the original spec, and you don't want to admit the spec was inadequate, it's an upgrade or enhancement. – FumbleFingers Oct 6 '14 at 20:30
  • 2
    It sounds like you're saying that the customer's report has been turned into a feature request. Is that right? – Barmar Oct 6 '14 at 20:33
up vote 1 down vote accepted

I would say "this behavior was not in the specification", and then the client can send you a CR (change request) to implement another behavior. "Not in the specification" both implies this is not really a bug but at the same time doesn't mean that current behavior was implemented on purpose, thus allowing both sides to feel OK.

I believe that the usual answer is "It's not a bug, it's an undocumented feature".

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.