It's only broken if you don't get the joke. Asking someone to review and merge a patch for strfry() is, if not unreasonable, then at least something that's reasonable to say "no" to.
When presented with a model bug report (includes good description, test cases, and even a patch) he felt the need to change the function, but instead of using the supplied patch he rewrites it himself and commits it without testing it. It is still broken. When this is pointed out he gets angry and complains about people wasting his time, when it was he that decided to waste his own time rewriting it his own way and he was the one that still got it wrong.
Everyone would have been better off if he had taken the sensible path of "read bug report", "confirm bug", "test patch", "commit patch" instead of arguing and rewriting things out of spite.
Seems to say it isn't used. I also contest that it _is_ broken. I cannot find a man page that promises that it uses a uniform distribution; one could even argue that such a function should not use an uniform distribution. For example, randomizing the non-uniformity of the distribution depending on the phase of the moon would, IMO, be a good idea for this function.
