On date Thursday 2011-06-30 15:24:00 +0200, Diego Biurrun encoded: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:12:28PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: [...] > > > That said, FFmpeg history has shown that old broken code never gets > > > fixed anyway, it's just left to rot and rot and rot ... > > > > There are notable exceptions, removing old broken/unused code should > > be done on a case-by-case basis and only if there is a real need for > > it. > > Which notable exceptions?
I remember base64-test, for example. > Unused and broken code should be deleted, it just clutters the codebase > for no gain at all. Or you fix it, better than dropping a feature, even if trivial (I find test programs pretty useful when debugging code, checking API and testing new features, reusing them is better than rewriting them from scratch). > We use revision control for many reasons. One is > that it becomes easy to resurrect old code - problem solved. You hid it, nobody sees it, nobody fixes it. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
