HTTP status codes have theoretical categories for ease of use: 100s for informational, 200s for success, 300s for redirection, 400s for client errors, and 500s for server errors. However, real-world implementations often deviate from these standards. For instance, LinkedIn uses a non-standard 999 code for unauthorized access. Shopify has introduced its own custom codes, and Apache even has a 218 code. WebDAV further complicates matters by adding new status codes and HTTP request verbs.A piece of generated code attempts to handle HTTP status codes by checking if the status code divided by 100 is not equal to 2. This approach treats any status code outside the 200 range as an error. The author criticizes this method, particularly the division by 100, arguing it incorrectly flags non-error responses like 300s as failures. For example, a 304 (Not Modified) code, which indicates cached content is still valid, would be misidentified as an error. This clever but flawed logic led to unnecessary failed requests, demonstrating a preference for mathematical trickery over robust error handling.