From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Check for redundancy Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:39:52 +0200 Message-ID: <87381ewn2f.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> 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 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435329706 7356 80.91.229.3 (26 Jun 2015 14:41:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:41:46 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 26 16:41:37 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 1Z8Uox-0005KB-3G for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:41:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60361 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Uow-0005AL-7E for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:41:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54405) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Uoi-0005AF-EG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:41:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Uod-0005Z9-C5 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:41:20 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:48487) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Uod-0005Z5-5y for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:41:15 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Uoa-0004yA-Le for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:41:12 +0200 Original-Received: from nl106-137-98.student.uu.se ([130.243.137.98]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:41:12 +0200 Original-Received: from embe8573 by nl106-137-98.student.uu.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:41:12 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Lines: 50 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: nl106-137-98.student.uu.se Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:KTgT/34oejNtuivh74hBIHZ2HGM= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:105195 Archived-At: Stefan Nobis writes: > at least for some people it seems important enough No doubt. I'm not in their exact positions (phew) so I can't tell for sure but it seems I disagree with them. > Nevertheless, I think at least for junior > programmers it might have some value (and for > programmers in the industry with a high time > pressure For junior programmers it doesn't have a value save for negative perhaps because junior programmers shouldn't worry and feel disheartened by what they did yesterday, they should just do new things, today! If they later on feel like (manually) asserting old code and make improvements and correct obvious inefficiencies, that's on the other hand very helpful. As for people in the industry working with high time pressure whatever they do will never beat the thing tons of people worked on, day in and day out, forever. If they can remove redundancy from then next FPS game with a movie licence I couldn't care less. > its helpful to refactor redundancies with just > a press of a button and adding some new names). Indeed, the type of redundancy checker that will just identify identical code blocks (yeah, two lines in a row will do) - this is not a bad idea. > Detecting patterns is one of the strong areas of > machine learning and redundancy is a pattern. > I would assume that AI methods will at least someday > be quite good at it. Is it really that difficult for a computer to do this? The suggestion to have defuns byte-compiled individually and then just compare the result sounds much more straightforward. Is there a prototype of that machine-learning pattern-detector one can examine peace and quiet? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573