2 ms·
The GP’s point isn’t that the model is wrong “because nuance X”, it’s that the model directly contradicts good practice. You also changed the model under consi
by abtinf 3y ago
The GP’s point isn’t that the model is wrong “because nuance X”, it’s that the model directly contradicts good practice.
You also changed the model under consideration (GP said compressed code size; you said just code size), disagreeing with a point the GP didn’t make.
- kqr 3y ago> The GP’s point isn’t that the model is wrong “because nuance X”, it’s that the model directly contradicts good practice. "Doesn't matter; had predictive value" is what comes to mind. "Good practise" isn't a defense against empirical evidence. That said, you're right that I missed the compressed part. I haven't tried compressing the source code before analysis, but I do suspect it would improve accuracy rather than decrease it. That's not a rigorous argument though, and I'm willing to accept that uncompressed code size might be a better model than compressed code size.