<i>&quot;This is exactly what debugging is&quot;</i><p>Yes and no. Debugging (in the sense that programmers do it) stops when you learn &quot;X wasn&#x27;t initialized&quot; or &quot;that buffer isn&#x27;t long enough for the trailing zero&quot;.<p>This is root cause analysis (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Root_cause_analysis" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Root_cause_analysis</a>). It goes way deeper into &quot;why the problem happened&quot;. The buffer may be undersized because the programmer isn&#x27;t educated well enough, because (s)he was too tired to think properly, because the spec specifying the maximum size was wrong, etc.<p>Each reason leads to a different fix, often through more iterations of asking &quot;why?&quot;<p>The programmer&#x27;s lack of education can be caused by a problem in hiring practices, by low quality of internal courses, etc.<p>The programmer may be tired because of long working hours, because of troubles at home, because (s)he goes out too much, etc.<p>That buffer size might be a typo, an OCR error, somebody declaring the maximum size to be N because, otherwise, the data couldn&#x27;t be fit in the current hardware, etc.<p>Each explanation comes with a different way to prevent the problem from occurring again (something that traditional debugging does nothing about. Initializing that variable makes the problem go away, but in itself does nothing from you writing code with initialized variables in the future)