On 2月8日, 上午8时51分, Terry <terry.yin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2月8日, 上午12时20分, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> wrote: > > > Terry <terry.yinzhe <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > > On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" <de...@nospam.web.de> wrote: > > > > Do you by any chance have a few examples of these? There is a lot of > > > > idiomatic code in python to e.g. acquire and release the GIL or doing > > > > refcount-stuff. If that happens to be done with rather generic names as > > > > arguments, I can well imagine that as being the cause. > > > Starting at line 5119 of D:\DOWNLOADS\Python-3.0\Python\Python-ast.c > > > This isn't really fair because Python-ast.c is auto generated. ;) > > Oops! I don't know that! Then the analysis will not be valid, since > too many duplications are from there.
Hey! I have to say sorry because I found I made a mistake. Because Python- ast.c is auto-generated and shouldn't be counted here, the right duplication rate of Python3.0 is very small (5%). And I found the duplications are quite trivial, I wound not say that all of them are acceptable, but certainly not a strong enough evident for code quality. I have made the same analysis to some commercial source code, the dup60 rate is quite often significantly larger than 15%. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
