It might well be called a kludge, if it happens to be one. (But "compensating" seems like the best word in general.) And here is a real world example--although I admit I'm making it up--but you decide if it could happen.
Someone reads a spec for a GPIO and fails to notice that a signal is asserted active low. They write dummy code to assert it with a ...
'Isn't this just code that works?'
Code is fresh vegetables: it goes stale and needs to be refreshed. Code is only valuable if it is maintainable. Mystery bugs makes it unmaintainable.
What if an exception happens between the first and second bug? The first bug is active after the exception!
In a testing campaign, if the software returns the expected results, then there is no bug. So this particular test case would be "OK" at the functional level.
You would find the bugs by doing unit testing, which means testing one function at a time. That would help you identify 2 unit bugs and fix them.
In the world of Thermodynamics, this would be considered an "entropic state". It might seem stable and balanced now, but eventually, it'll all come crashing down!
By the sound of it, they're not actually bugs and perhaps are intended for different situations.
In calculus, what you have are two expressions that evaluate to the same result with three values: