[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Check for redundancy
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Check for redundancy |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:21:03 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> The term is not specific to programming: expressing things which have been
> expressed already.
Obviously, Drew knows that. The issue is that if you want to check for
redundancy in code, it's presumably by doing it with another piece of
code. That other piece of code will have to encode formally what you
mean by redundancy, so to be able to write it, you'll need to describe
formally what you mean by redundancy. And that's pretty damn hard for
the usual interesting cases of redundancy.
Of course, you could also use machine-learning to define "redundancy" by
way of a set of examples used to train your machine-learning code.
Not sure how well it would work, nor how to make it work well.
Stefan
- Check for redundancy, Andreas Röhler, 2015/06/24
- RE: Check for redundancy, Drew Adams, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy, Andreas Röhler, 2015/06/24
- Message not available
- Re: Check for redundancy,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy, Stefan Monnier, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/25
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/26
- Re: Check for redundancy, Marcin Borkowski, 2015/06/26
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/26
- Re: Check for redundancy, Robert Thorpe, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/28