2 ms·
There’s going to be a massive amount of false positives: “I see you used “for i in...” and that copies this SO question about iteration...”
by 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
There’s going to be a massive amount of false positives:
“I see you used “for i in...” and that copies this SO question about iteration...”
- ben509 7y agoAgreed, you'd definitely need a mechanism to mitigate false positives. One technique would be to try and define what constitutes "trivial" code. Another would be to prioritize sources. Documentation from standard or major third party libraries should take precedence over SO. Another would be a feedback mechanism. If repo authors vote a particular snippet up or down, after a threshold it could be excluded from matching. Or you could opt-in by means of a comment, though this might make it useless.