[jsword-devel] Big Patch
joe at eireneh.com
Tue Jun 22 07:20:21 MST 2004
Thanks for all this. I'm away from home tonight, but I should be able to
get some time soon.
> With the patch I moved some resources around. So that means some files
> can be deleted. For whatever reason, these don't often get deleted by
> applying the patch. And for that reason, I am listing the files which
> should be deleted because they have been moved:
> resource/readings and contents
> The following are DEAD but Eclipse did not display them as tasks when I
> added the task tag. So ultimately they are not tagged.
> resource/version and contents
> resource/xsl.test and contents
> resource/xsl.swing and contents
> To list the DEAD tasks in Eclipse you can go to:
> Window->Preferences->Java->Task Tags
> and add it.
> I also added the ones listed in jsword/tags.txt.
> Some thoughts on DEAD code (i.e. my opinion):
> By marking code as DEAD it helps me understand the code as a whole. It
> becomes obvious what I can ignore.
> Some of the code that is marked DEAD is actually still used but is only
> used by code that is also marked DEAD. Ultimately, it is not used by
> code that is used in Bible Desktop. So if the DEAD code is deleted it
> should be if there are no actual uses (i.e. really DEAD).
> Some DEAD code is genuinely useful as sample code, as a repository of
> ideas. I think that this kind of sample code should be managed elsewhere.
> Some DEAD code represented work-arounds of Java problems that have since
> been solved. Or new techniques have replaced old ones. For example,
> Actions, Cut&Paste, Drag&Drop, Documents and filters, logging have been
> added to or have significantly changed in core Java. As long as we are
> not going to go back to a previous JDK, it is probably best to remove
> these as they are replaced.
> Some DEAD code is obviously code that is under development or abandoned
> development. It may at some time become live code. It probably would be
> best to also tag this code as FUTURE if it will become "live".
> DEAD code is not robustly tested and is not trustworthy. Too often I
> have seen "robust" classes with all the methods one could possibly think
> of but they are not part of a regression suite or test by use case. And
> when they are incorporated into code it is often with the false
> assumptions that it works and that it is in use elsewhere. When the code
> was developed it was under a certain semantic design that might not
> currently be the case as the rest of the code has evolved to its current
> state. By marking it DEAD it becomes clear that the code is not
> trustworthy to simply add without robust testing.
> I think that the only kind of DEAD code that should be kept is that
> which *will* become part of the code. The rest should be archived or
> deleted. But as long as it is clearly marked, I am happy.
> DM Smith wrote:
>> I have modified 98 files across all projects. It may sound like a lot,
>> but most of the files have only a few lines of changes.
> ... lots deleted ...
> jsword-devel mailing list
> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
More information about the jsword-devel