On Wed, 20 Oct 2021, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > ... and arguably they would be correct. > > Well, yes ... that's why I don't want one "fix" that generates a > cascading sequence of further "fixes". > OTOH, if you don't "fix" it, it generates a cascading sequence of copy-and-paste antipatterns in new code, and poor training data for those of us reading old code. Anyway, I agree that the churn would be too risky. But it sure would be nice if automatic tools were able to perform a program transformation of this kind at the source level, being that the compiler will surely do it anyway at a lower level. There's a lot to be said for source code that reflects the compiler's understanding of the logic, rather than the human's.
