alt Hacker NewsNo doubt fuzzers (vibecoded or otherwise) can be powerful, but can't you just mark all "/" as potential divide by zero errors?
I guess sometimes developers think they "know" some variable won't be zero, but unless it checked explicitly or by the compiler, that shouldn't be trusted.
Replies
saghm • today at 7:32 PM
Fuzzers find inputs, not just "potential" errors that aren't triggerable.
dooglius • today at 7:20 PM
What are you suggesting and how would it be different than how SIGFPE already works?
wvbdmp • today at 7:17 PM
I mean there could be a guard clause? But yeah, seems like this could be statically evaluated like how some IDEs see a null check and don’t complain about nullability within the same scope.
> but can't you just mark all "/" as potential divide by zero errors?
If you’re accepting large false positives rates: yes.
If you want users to take your warnings serious: no.
(Nitpick: you certainly don’t want to flag _all_ of them. Divisions by non-zero constants definitely should be excluded, for example (integer division by -1 can lead to overflow, but that would be a different warning))