removing unused #include?

[Burgaud]

After several modifications to scripts, I end up with several #include that I am not sure still in use.

What is the best procedure for removing unused #includes then?

a) Delete the #Include and see if script will crash? rinse repeat

b) just have them and forget it...

 

 

[Musashi]

You could also take a look at the thread organize-includes

EDIT :

Quote

b) just have them and forget it...

I would not recommend this, for the sake of clean code .

Edited February 5, 2021 by Musashi

[Nine]

Check also this nice feature, it is not perfect, but very useful for me.  We know pretty much the BIG includes that we need, but those that relates to constants are not always very clear :

#AutoIt3Wrapper_Add_Constants=y

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Nine

[RTFC]

CodeScanner will produce a list of redundant #includes.

[JockoDundee]

1 hour ago, RTFC said:

CodeScanner will produce a list of redundant #includes.

Yes, but does it produce a list of superfluous #includes?

[Jos]

Au3stripper will simply strip anything that isn't necessary.

[JockoDundee]

1 hour ago, Jos said:

Au3stripper will simply strip anything that isn't necessary.

There goes most of my code

[Jos]

4 minutes ago, JockoDundee said:

There goes most of my code

+80%  in Lines&Characters is quite common yes....

[JockoDundee]

It’s well known that all non-trivial programs are twice as long as they need be and contain at least one bug.

Therefore, recursively all programs can be reduced to one line of code - which is a bug.

[Jos]

The savings mainly come from the #included files which sub include a lot of other files.

[RTFC]

On 2/5/2021 at 5:33 PM, JockoDundee said:

superfluous #includes

Maybe look up the definition of "redundant"?

[JockoDundee]

6 hours ago, RTFC said:

Maybe look up the definition of "redundant"?

Ok.

I can see your confusion and I sympathize, at the same time and as you can see above, redundant can be used in a way that is not wholly synonymous with superfluous.  
To wit, redundant applied to the subject at hand could mean #includes that are repeated; as is not an uncommon usage, for example:

Redundant, used in that sense, draws a clear, if subtle distinction with superfluous; for instance an #include that is merely extraneous, as opposed to duplicative. Support for this parochial usage of superfluous in this sense is also extant.

If we apply our faculties for discernment fully, we would see that the OP is specifically referring to the use case most precisely defined as superfluous, (although, I do not deny that being superfluous always carries an unshakeable taint of redundancy).

On 2/5/2021 at 5:33 AM, Burgaud said:

After several modifications to scripts, I end up with several #include that I am not sure still in use.

Moreover, the usage is not purely pedantic;  the logic for a tool designed to root out just duplicative includes instead of extraneous includes could diverge greatly; namely the in the former case one could merely scan #include statements and without further investigation into their contents, be determinative.

Penultimately, and by way of an excuse, I would like to note that in my original post, the word superfluous was intentionally emphasized.

On 2/5/2021 at 8:33 AM, JockoDundee said:

Yes, but does it produce a list of superfluous #includes?

And as is evident, the language mirrors your statement in my rejoinder, clearly intending to make the distinction between the two adjectives (to which you very astutely were aware of, at least on some level )

On 2/5/2021 at 7:09 AM, RTFC said:

CodeScanner will produce a list of redundant #includes.

Finally, and IMHO, when we are presented with such clues, we should do our best to indulge our conversational partner by striving to look for their intended meaning with an earnest effort; and avoid the temptation of issuing a reflexively puerile response.

Edited February 11, 2021 by JockoDundee
My parenthetical ending above “some level)” caused an emoticon to be inadvertently created, so I added a space before the paren.

[Earthshine]

🙄

Edited February 12, 2021 by Earthshine

[Earthshine]

https://www.google.com/search?q=redundant&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari

Honestly I’m tired of reading your mindless drivel.  You know what he meant as did we all but you like to misconstrue stuff in your twisted views  that you may think is logic. Please stop

 

adjective

1. not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous.

   "many of the old skills had become redundant"

Edited February 12, 2021 by Earthshine

[Jos]

1 hour ago, Earthshine said:

Honestly I’m tired of reading your mindless drivel.  

Just hit the ignore button when you feel he's making stupid remarks!  (so guess you don't need to react often  ) 

[JockoDundee]

7 hours ago, Earthshine said:

Honestly I’m tired of reading your mindless drivel.

Honestly, I believe you, it can’t be fun.
For others not aware, here is the most recent “mindless drivel”, (posted yesterday) that Earthshine may have found especially “tiring to read”, in response to him steadfastly insisting that fast boot times are more attributable to faster CPU’s than the use of SSD’s.  

 

 

[Melba23]

JockoDundee & Earthshine,

Enough. If you want to continue then do so by PM. Any more posts like those above in open forum and you will both find it hard to post at all for a while.

All clear?

M23

[JockoDundee]

5 minutes ago, Melba23 said:

All clear?

Yes, and I agree 100%.