Wondering whether that's better or worse than the expected ones....

I believe this is specific to software. Back when I was programming, a fair amount of work went into error checking. For example, you might ask the user for input, needing, say, an integer, and the user would enter “a”. You’d then test the variable to see if it fit your parameters, and then continue or loop back.

The “a” would be an “expected error.” OTOH, something that was unanticipated by the programmer, for example a stack overflow, might not have a correction routine, so the program would jump to an “unexpected error” function and exit.

It does sound funny, though. Logically, all errors should be unexpected. Otherwise, they’d be avoided. But in computers, linear programming works in a very structured environment. A computer can only do what it’s told, and it will only output what someone has told it to. Sometimes, us regular users just get pissed at PC LOAD LETTER, so we kidnap the printer and beat its ass in a field.

*Fun fact: PC LOAD LETTER means “Paper Cartridge Load Letter (8.5 x 11 paper). The original HP printer had a very limited lcd screen, so that was a programmer’s abbreviation, and it kinda stuck through newer printer versions.

But we will need your “Testing Procedure Specification,” report to be completed and submitted for effective Quality Assurance compliance of coding and processes...

Let’s call it a feature and move on…

0-0