Python3.0 has more duplication in source code than Python2.5

"Martin v. Löwis" martin at
Sat Feb 7 23:36:25 CET 2009

> yet the general tone of the responses has been more defensive than i would
> have expected.  i don't really understand why.  nothing really terrible,
> given the extremes you get on the net in general, but still a little
> disappointing.

I think this is fairly easy to explain. The OP closes with the question
"Does that say something about the code quality of Python3.0?"
thus suggesting that the quality of Python 3 is poor.

Nobody likes to hear that the quality of his work is poor. He then goes
on saying

"But it seems that the stable & successful software releases tend to
have relatively stable duplication rate."

suggesting that Python 3.0 cannot be successful, because it doesn't have
a relatively stable duplication rate.

Nobody likes to hear that a project one has put many month into cannot
be successful.

Hence the defensive responses.

> i'm not saying there is such a solution.  i'm not even saying that there
> is certainly a problem.  i'm just making the quiet observation that the
> original information is interesting, might be useful, and should be
> welcomed.

The information is interesting. I question whether it is useful as-is,
as it doesn't tell me *what* code got duplicated (and it seems it is
also incorrect, since it includes analysis of generated code). While I
can welcome the information, I cannot welcome the conclusion that the
OP apparently draws from them.


More information about the Python-list mailing list