How to report probable bugs or quirks to WRI? What is the standard way to do it? Is there a known list of bugs maintained by WRI? Can we track the status of bugs anywhere?

up vote 13 down vote accepted

Bugs should not be reported here on this site. If you know that it is a bug, don't post here, contact WRI about it instead (

Questions about how to work around bugs are welcome though.

(I added this information in the wiki a while ago.)

Note: Please don't use the tag for new questions. The idea is that this will be added to questions when the problem is confirmed to be a bug (based on e.g. community consensus). This tag can be useful for many reasons (being aware of problems and knowing how to work around them---I found myself searching MathGroup for some old bug several times to make sure my code won't be affected by it), but we'd like to avoid new users reporting bugs here or adding this tag to problems they think are bugs but really stem from misunderstandings.

I like your idea of a bug-confirmed tag, because it clearly announces that bug isn't just an omnibus complaint tag. However, creating a bug-report tag--which you also suggest--seems contrary to the advice in your note here. If you want to be perfectly clear about usage, how about creating a bug-workaround tag? – whuber Mar 27 '12 at 18:34
Community consensus is too vague for my tastes. See also here – Sjoerd C. de Vries Mar 27 '12 at 19:38
@whuber You're confusing Szabolcs and me. The two-label approach is my suggestion, so Szabolcs' isn't contradicting himself. Alternatively to 'bug-report' I'd suggest the use of 'bug-possible' or something similar – Sjoerd C. de Vries Mar 27 '12 at 20:42
My apologies to both of you about the confusion--I guess I have unconsciously lumped all originators of great replies whose handles begin with "S" into the same category :-). And yes, bug-possible is a little clearer than bug-report. – whuber Mar 27 '12 at 20:58
This policy seems inconsistent to me, work around should not be the only acceptable discussion. Many well received "bug" questions limit themselves to confirmation in different platforms but end up providing insight on the cause of the problem. Users come here to solve their Mma problems and bugs are clearly one cause of this problems. Having an acknowledgement that the problem exists and in which versions was fixed may not be the ultimate answer, but does help. – rhermans Oct 23 '15 at 16:22
Personally I always link to Mma.SE when reporting a bug to Wolfram Technical Support because that provides a broader description of the issue with experiences in multiple platforms and very likely a distillation of the conditions that triggers the problem. – rhermans Oct 23 '15 at 16:30

I saw Sjoerd removed the from this question, so I came here to see what the points of view are. To be clear: I agree with the removal of the tag since it's not a confirmed bug.

On the other hand I would like to have some tag indicating that OP suspects it's a bug. That's the core of the question, not "notebook" as it is tagged now. But it's only indicated in the title, which IMO is not the right place.

I'm for a and a tag. The first one is a better indicator of the status than simply , and I would feel invited to test OP's code to see if I can reproduce reported behavior.

When to switch from to ? How about: when the behavior is confirmed for the same Mathematica version by at least 2 (or 3?) other users?

I would incinerate the tag.

edit (re Mr.Wizard's concerns)
I don't see the problem with neophytes using the tag when it's no bug at all. If it is because he doesn't seem to understand how Mathematica works it can be explained in a comment or answer and the tag removed.

I don't know that I agree with this. There have been quite a few times that a neophyte user thinks something is a bug which isn't; rather than having them tag it "bug-possible" I think it's better to let it unfold naturally. It is entirely helpful to be able to search for confirmed bugs, but I don't know about possible bugs like the one in the linked question. I'm not voting either way yet; perhaps you can address some of my concerns. – Mr.Wizard Oct 18 '12 at 9:59
Also, I think this should problem be a question of its own not buried here. – Mr.Wizard Oct 18 '12 at 10:00
@Mr.Wizard - I posted here mainly as a response to Szabolcs' answer and the comments to that. I agree that it digresses from the original question. I'll update my answer re your concerns. – stevenvh Oct 18 '12 at 10:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .