> 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 valu

> 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.