From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBSw7ZobGVy?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Check for redundancy Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:55:15 +0200 Message-ID: <558AC4D3.6030509@easy-emacs.de> References: <558A7875.4050905@easy-emacs.de> <24a1b328-82a8-44ff-8f8d-1425ab89ab67@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435157817 25664 80.91.229.3 (24 Jun 2015 14:56:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:56:57 +0000 (UTC) To: Drew Adams , help-gnu-emacs Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 24 16:56:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7m6a-0007r6-Bx for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:56:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51134 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7m6Z-00071r-Ss for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:56:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42722) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7m5L-0005mg-8B for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:55:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7m5H-0006vi-HG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:55:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.130]:64260) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7m5H-0006tK-3s for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:55:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.178.31] ([77.3.55.37]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue005) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M7o7Y-1YuNxZ3VxY-00vP0y; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:55:21 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: <24a1b328-82a8-44ff-8f8d-1425ab89ab67@default> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:pL/11J1uoIk7honFcgSk1FCt/SX+2ZYpr5EXLr4S6Zp0NG9IPTN KDHmhd93QoYoFBn9TWC03UGmd/CPTx25vd+1qJsExPPJImt8jBT6QCQDZe76x/C3rXfWVjO HEDPvn8pi2GcmUoEnZOq7BN1qSdlRHR0pm8Buf5Oj/2EM48/vMq51RujWm3XlDSNF56O2RE 7xxaHGxLT+mp4OSTIL7sA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:p6w9Q4NLpqU=:YNec8QmItw04thEA6UsWQ8 +Zbuove+AQN//xfsML+MgbIJknFt7iYw84xM/0x/gu4mKVMTTPBqN5kbkJE5/8ek/Gd/dInZA Zroji6x2Sh8+S5jw28eMGqi7QGRWtXtbxC4L4ORBEyoblVnCM1vwt6DL39LUzriFeZ6EtP3VB MDbh9OGHGL6PPv7j9Aqxqm0mE2b1hR+G4ML2aB8InTHwqNIFa+I3Rk3UCFdQbdvF9KxNq9acH yHklih+naiLHorPzWGH7oDTJF13cl+s5Hg5MBzHAimgbb/N/lYkLfZtrNT34d3pjpt1DjPZrs rj6G2zlVworhomtQ7qgly5JDPNuj0inGJojajwZfY0kUj393liFY/LBG5iRJar+l/ke+kAjvm 7tL54OLlBnncZDb9lg1WqdFZ/ZGDWq0vA5fE7FNlfbT3JiW5qWKsVcRd3AiD3AI/iJAb9r5iL WQHMGlA8hlkcyEOYQtxc8cR7sIS1V9Kv2yrHqDmmieJK6G08DQbT7yxlZUSZuyF+3J+WWLYu/ 8a/FFwI3RN/SqU6WTbJuuUadA9AxwF4LvAf9d0RO8i8NPjn5shN0PE7HZTaiUUjgdXI3uA2MA YOjPqDGaUEjBs+PjsQwBPqJ98Ri7gX/uBT3lRfc/3Z5a0PffKkzk9pTOVHzQT5nGLDUJBIusu xwFF05uyu1Zsg3vxPKMhlnjZSzf1k83cptyoyxv8I/yEk6A== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.126.130 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:105126 Archived-At: Am 24.06.2015 um 15:23 schrieb Drew Adams: >> is there a check for redundancy in code? >> Byte-compile warnings seem not to cover this. > I don't have an answer. But maybe start by defining "redundancy". > Do you mean more than one definition of something in a file? > A function? variable? macro? The term is not specific to programming: expressing things which have been expressed already. Human language needs it, as we may not grasp the meaning at first time, also repeating contributs to sense sometimes. WRT to programming: for example two or more functions taking the same kind of arguments, producing the same result but are named differently and reside at different places in code. Given these code is designed to be processed at same time and location, that would be redundant. Pertains to all kind of definitions.