[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Dead Code, Part 2

From: mattack
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Dead Code, Part 2
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:26:07 -0800 (PST)

On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Henry Nelson wrote:

>Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 10:25:37 +0900 (JST)
>From: Henry Nelson <address@hidden>
>Reply-To: address@hidden
>To: address@hidden
>Subject: Re: lynx-dev Dead Code, Part 2
>> Based on this, I think I can safely advocate the complete eradication 
>> of HTAAServ.c and HTHistory.c.
>Not "eradication", please.  Simply delete them from the list of object
>files in the, with a comment that you have done so, and they
>will not be linked in.  Either that or wrap the whole of the files in
>one big ifdef (which Klaus already indicated would probably be possible
>for a general use Lynx).

I am missing something.. If it's completely unused code, why not obsolete the
file?  (The code is all in some cvs repository or something right?)

I mean, if there are revisions of Lynx source code back through history, it
would be possible to see when these functions *were* used..  But I don't 
see why you can't make it so people don't get the file unless they really really
want it..

>> In the next week or so I should be able to get around to a more 
>> sophisticated analysis of the dead code in lynx, using a graph algorithm 
>> to look for unattached call trees.
>Don't get me wrong, though, what you are doing (and have been doing; it has
>not gone unnoticed) is a Godsend to Lynx and VERY welcome from this corner.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]