Re^2: Perl Analyzer?

Those are exactly the kind of subroutines that would be nice to find and refactor so that

$pencolor

is passed in rather than hardcoded. Paper and highlighter? I asked the question because I don't want to waste time doing that. I feel that 'copy and paste' sytle code leads to code bloat and very, very fragile code.

Comment on Re^2: Perl Analyzer?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Perl Analyzer? by swampyankee (Parson) on Aug 17, 2006 at 03:27 UTC
Ideally, you're right: code like that should be refactored unless there's a good reason not to do so (like a requirement to maintain subroutine interfaces, as it was in the `pencolor` case I mentioned. The code was actually in Fortran-66, and I detest `ENTRY` statements). It would, however, be quite difficult to have a program determine that two subs are doing the same thing, using different code, like one calculating factorials recursively and another doing so with a loop. emc Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards. Vernon Sanders Law	[reply]
Re^4: Perl Analyzer? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Aug 17, 2006 at 07:06 UTC
It would, however, be quite difficult to have a program determine that two subs are doing the same thing, using different code, like one calculating factorials recursively and another doing so with a loop. So difficult as to be impossible in the general case - since it reduces to the halting problem.	[reply]