> I have made the same analysis to some commercial source code, the
> dup60 rate is quite often significantly larger than 15%.
commercial code sucks often .. that's why they hide it :)
--
дамјан ( http://softver.org.mk/damjan/ )
Scarlett Johansson: You always see the glass half-empty.
Woody Al
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Terry wrote:
I have made the same analysis to some commercial source code, the
dup60 rate is quite often significantly larger than 15%.
En Sun, 08 Feb 2009 07:10:12 -0200, Henry Read
escribió:
I don't think code duplication rate has strong relationship to
I don't think code duplication rate has strong relationship towards code
quality.
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Terry wrote:
> On 2月8日, 上午8时51分, Terry wrote:
> > On 2月8日, 上午12时20分, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >
> > > Terry gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > > On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch"
On 2月8日, 上午8时51分, Terry wrote:
> On 2月8日, 上午12时20分, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>
> > Terry gmail.com> writes:
>
> > > On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" 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 relea
On 2月8日, 上午12时20分, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> Terry gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" 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
> yet the general tone of the responses has been more defensive than i would
> have expected. i don't really understand why. nothing really terrible,
> given the extremes you get on the net in general, but still a little
> disappointing.
I think this is fairly easy to explain. The OP closes with
Steve Holden wrote:
>> You'd best hope the copied section was thoroughly reviewed otherwise
>> you're
>> duplicating a flaw across X other sections. And then you also best hope
>> that
>> whoever finds said flaw and fixes it is also smart enough to check for
>> similar constructs around the code ba
-On [20090207 21:07], Steve Holden (st...@holdenweb.com) wrote:
>This is probably preferable to five different developers solving the
>same problem five different ways and introducing three *different* bugs, no?
I guess the answer would be 'that depends', but in most cases you would be
correct, ye
> This is probably preferable to five different developers solving the
> same problem five different ways and introducing three *different* bugs, no?
With the examples presented, I'm not convinced that there is actually
significant code duplication going on in the first place.
Regards,
Martin
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> -On [20090207 18:25], Scott David Daniels (scott.dani...@acm.org) wrote:
>> This analysis overlooks the fact that 3.0 _was_ a major change, and is
>> likely to grow cut-and-paste solutions to some problems as we switch to
>> Unicode strings from byte strings.
-On [20090207 18:25], Scott David Daniels (scott.dani...@acm.org) wrote:
>This analysis overlooks the fact that 3.0 _was_ a major change, and is
>likely to grow cut-and-paste solutions to some problems as we switch to
>Unicode strings from byte strings.
You'd best hope the copied section was thoro
> But the duplication are always not very big, from about 100 lines
> (rare) to less the 5 lines. As you can see the Rate30 is much bigger
> than Rate60, that means there are a lot of small duplications.
I don't find that important for code quality. It's the large chunks
that I would like to see d
> And I'm not saying that you can not have duplication in code. But it
> seems that the stable & successful software releases tend to have
> relatively stable duplication rate.
So if some software has an instable duplication rate, it probably
means that it is either not stable, or not successful.
Terry wrote:
... I'm not saying that you can not have duplication in code. But it
seems that the stable & successful software releases tend to have
relatively stable duplication rate.
This analysis overlooks the fact that 3.0 _was_ a major change, and is
likely to grow cut-and-paste solutions t
Terry gmail.com> writes:
> On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" 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
> >
On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" wrote:
> Terry schrieb:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >>> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
> >> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> >> completely could already account for that increas
On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" wrote:
> Terry schrieb:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >>> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
> >> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> >> completely could already account for that increas
On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" wrote:
> Terry schrieb:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >>> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
> >> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> >> completely could already account for that increas
On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" wrote:
> Terry schrieb:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >>> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
> >> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> >> completely could already account for that increas
On 2月7日, 下午7时10分, "Diez B. Roggisch" wrote:
> Terry schrieb:
>
> > On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >>> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
> >> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> >> completely could already account for that increas
Terry schrieb:
On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
completely could already account for that increase.
It would be interesting to see what specific files have gaine
On 2月7日, 下午3时36分, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
>
> Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
> completely could already account for that increase.
>
> It would be interesting to see what specific files have gained
> la
> Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?
Not necessarily. IIUC, copying a single file with 2000 lines
completely could already account for that increase.
It would be interesting to see what specific files have gained
large numbers of additional files, compared to 2.5.
Regar
I used a CPD (copy/paste detector) in PMD to analyze the code
duplication in Python source code. I found that Python3.0 contains
more duplicated code than the previous versions. The CPD tool is far
from perfect, but I still feel the analysis makes some sense.
|Source Code | NLOC | Dup60
24 matches
Mail list logo
