-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
Remove commented code #513
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Thanks @dan-drews , this is great. I do not see a reason for keeping unnecessary commented out code. |
Can we just nuke Microsoft.ML.InternalStreams? |
@Ivanidzo4ka I was curious about that too. Is there any background on that project? There is a lot of code in there that just feels very old. I came across several properties that were not auto-properties, there are tons of #IF compiler directives that seem to have no use, etc... Update |
This is really old code which has nothing to do with ML.NET, and I'm not sure how it end up in this repository. Generally it's suppose to provide wrappers to access different types of streams (SQL tables for example) but again this is really old code, (pre dotnet CLR) which not suppose to be in this repository. |
* First attempt at removing extra code comments * Round #2 * Removing Microsoft.ML.InternalStreams per comment on #513 * Address notes from @Ivanidzo4ka * Remove TreeOrderedCandidatesSearch * Remove whitespace and reinstate commented out tests
…#514) * First attempt at removing extra code comments * Round #2 * Removing Microsoft.ML.InternalStreams per comment on dotnet#513 * Address notes from @Ivanidzo4ka * Remove TreeOrderedCandidatesSearch * Remove whitespace and reinstate commented out tests
While digging into the source code, I discovered a large amount of commented out code throughout the solution.
Unless there is a reason behind this that I am not aware of, I think it is best to remove this. In a worst-case scenario, we have the git history to take care of this.
One example is in UnbufferedStream.cs, the following code is all commented out:
I haven't yet discovered the extent of this, but I think some work should be done on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: