[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Check for redundancy
From: |
Emanuel Berg |
Subject: |
Re: Check for redundancy |
Date: |
Thu, 25 Jun 2015 04:07:24 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) |
Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> writes:
> A pretty easy (and safe) way is to define redundancy
> as "functional equivalence" (which is what the OP
> mean, I think) and then compare the
> generated bytecode.
Have ten programmers solve the same problem, then
compile - do you now have ten instances of identical
bytecode? I don't think so.
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
- Re: Check for redundancy, (continued)
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, tomas, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Yuri Khan, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Robert Thorpe, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/28
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy, Óscar Fuentes, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy,
Emanuel Berg <=
- Re: Check for redundancy, Óscar Fuentes, 2015/06/24
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/24
- Message not available
- Re: Check for redundancy, Stefan Nobis, 2015/06/25
- Re: Check for redundancy, Andreas Röhler, 2015/06/25
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/26
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/26
- Message not available
- Re: Check for redundancy, Stefan Nobis, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/27
- Re: Check for redundancy, Emanuel Berg, 2015/06/27