[Pharo-project] A radical proposal (to cut down dead code)

Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse at inria.fr
Tue May 31 07:47:46 CEST 2011


On May 31, 2011, at 4:27 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Craig Latta <craig at 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.  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.  IMO, only by doing this will you be able to define what's used in the image.  One could try and relate the messages used to the publish date of packages to try and get some idea of the up-to-date-ness of messages.  One can perhaps attempt to make some determination of the liveness of the package by asking the community (basing this on e.g. last time it was downloaded creates the heisenbug of package trawling needing to download packages.

Yes.
I hope that we will be able to use a Ring based code database + metacello configuration repository for that.


> Am I mad or is the set of packages out there in Monitcello repositories and on SqueakMap what really constitutes the working set that the base image needs to support?
> 
> best,
> Eliot
> 
> 
> -C
> 
> --
> Craig Latta
> www.netjam.org/resume
> +31 06 2757 7177
> + 1 415 287 3547
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 




More information about the Pharo-project mailing list