[nullc]

I'm mystified at the attitude. Why not a "er. I see how that's a footgun, although it is the documented behavior. Lets figure out how to make this safe, just remove it because it's not very useful, or at least put big warnings on it."

Who cares if the user ran random commands? Users are going to do that sometimes, even highly experienced users sometimes have a bad day. Commands ought not erase the home directory unless it's fairly obvious that they're going to do so.

The task of the programmer is to make the computer work well even with imperfect use... if we imagine a spherical perfect user in simple harmonic motion we'd need only equip them with a repl prompt and they could just directly write the code for the computer to do exactly what they want.

Given that we're authoring code for third parties at all we must be assuming that the user is bounded in terms of time, knowledge, and potentially capability and attention... and in every case any fault is a share consequence of the author and the user. If nothing else at the extreme it's the programmers fault for failing to anticipate a sufficiently advanced idiot or the users fault for choosing to run some bozo's software. :)

And here the user could simply have privately cursed the software and went on without reporting it, leaving it to some other hapless victim to blow their foot off... so a bit of explicit gratitude would have been justified in both directions, for reporting the bad behavior and for looking into the report.