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

[Webmaster Jim]

On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 05:12:14PM -0500, 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.
> 
> Here are five tactics for dealing with the dead code in lynx (which I'd 
> estimate at about 3%).  For each one, of course, I'm omitting the obvious 
> "except for code that somebody has plans to use/update in the immediate 
> future" clause.
> 
> 1) "Complete removal."  Remove dead files such as HTAAServ.c, cut the lines 
>    between #if 0 and company, etc.  This means that some elements of 
>    "history" might get lost, since lynx doesn't have a publicly-readable
>    cvs server or something similar.
>    PRO: smaller code base, smaller distribution, smaller binary, etc.
>    CON: "History loss" unless a source control system is implemented
>  ...
> Personally, I think that the only proper, long-term strategy is to 
> adopt a source control mechanism so that the project history can be 
> examined, and then to use (1).  But I recognize that I'm only one 
> developer, and that changing the development process affects every 
> developer as well as making the maintainer's task harder in the short term.

We have a source code control system; it's just broken now for public
access. See my note on the tiny distribution as well.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Marvin the Paranoid Android.