Em 30/05/2011 23:27, Eliot Miranda < eliot.miranda@gmail.com > escreveu:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Craig Latta <craig@netjam.org> wrote:
[It's] impossible to authoritatively classify anything as "dead
code" unless there's a reference standard of what's core and what's not core... Yeah, in the meantime I define "dead" as "not run for some amount of time".
Surely "dead" means not used in the transitive closure of useful packages. Â I don't see anyone in this thread proposing to trawl Monticello repositories looking for the latest versions of packages and then analysing what messages these packages send.
Perhaps could we use this insight and reverse the consequent and the antecedent: how about have Monticello when having packages deposited create a database of messages sent? To start it could be just a set and afterwards we could go after the "real thing" with a kind of associative tree so we could know which packages are clients of which methods. my 0.1999999..... -- Cesar Rabak