Re: lynx-dev Dead code tactics: call for comments

[Leonid Pauzner]

12-Mar-99 17:12 John Bley wrote:
> I've enumerated several dozen functions which I believe are dead code.
> In addition, there are several thousand lines sitting between dead #if
> constructions (a wide variety of them).  There are code-level features
> (such as SHORT_NAMES) that haven't been used in a long time and wouldn't work
> anyway with a current source tree since newer code doesn't adhere to them.

I grep all CHANGES* files for word "SHORT_NAMES" and no match found.
Seems there is no reason to leave them any longer.


As of this thread I am very close to KED point of view:
13-Mar-99 15:47 Kim DeVaughn wrote:
> OTOH, I *can't* see removing small 1 or 2 line fn()'s that form part of
> a general, orthogonal function-set, even when not currently used.  For
> example:
[...]

> In short, I think deletions should be done on a case-by-case basis,
> with some value-judgement applied, rather than blindly chopping out
> *all* unused fn()'s.