They will soon. I'm sure someone will manage to break it. It's amazing what weird-ass ways people find to break software.
In the online text game I used to GM, I rewrote the PUT command to handle every single potential parsing situation. PUT SHOE IN SACK, PUT SHOE IN BOX, PUT BOX IN SACK, PUT SHOE IN BOX IN SACK, PUT SHOE IN BOX IN SECOND RED SACK and on and on. I was so proud of what I had done.
Not even an hour after my upgraded version was released to the public, a well-known player sent up a bug report and I went down to investigate.
Him: "So I'm concerned about this."
Me: "What'd you find?"
He then puts his pants into his backpack...
while he's still wearing them. He didn't go into his backpack, just the pants. The PUT command just obediently whisked them from his legs directly into his backpack.
Him: "This is really funny and unexpected, I figured you should know about it."
Me: "OH NO THIS IS A DISASTER!"
...see, I realized what this meant was that I had forgotten to test whether the item he was PUTting was actually
in one of his hands to start with. Easy enough to fix, right? Basically add one line of code: "IF NOT ((item=RH) OR (item=LH)) THEN RETURN <fail>," right? Well, I also realized that this meant that anyone could've put ANYTHING from the game into their backpack straight off the floor. "You see some mountains in the distance." <PUT> "You put the mountains into your backpack." The potential damage to the game was downright incalculable. The routines had passed QC and been reviewed by multiple peers prior to release, and yet some smart player finds this bug in less than an hour without even having access to the code. Fortunately nobody else had discovered it.
--Patrick