-1

I'm working on a project and a Visual Studio Solution and I didn't create this from scratch myself. I was trying to check if a file that belongs to the solution is rudimentary or not. I have observed two things:

  1. There are no references to this file in any other files belonging to the solution.
  2. I deleted (I can recreate the file by using the version control system) and tried rebuilding the solution, compiling and executing the web application. I managed to do that and I can still use this application.

Is it correct to draw the conclusion that the file is rudimentary based on those observations? I was looking for the answer by searching the Internet but it's hard to get relevant hits when using Google. At least in this case.

The file in question is an xsd file and I also deleted some other files with the same name as this xsd file (but with different file extensions).

  • 1
    Did you really mean [rudimentary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rudimentary) or rather [obsolete](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obsolete)? – Hans Kesting Jun 14 '18 at 13:15
  • What definition of "*rudimentary*" are you using? It usually means "simplistic" or "primitive", etc. It seems like what you mean is "unnecessary" or "superfluous". – RBarryYoung Jun 14 '18 at 13:15
  • Well, yes I mean obsolete as rudimentary can be used as a synonym for obsolete. – PhysicistEngineer Jun 14 '18 at 19:02

1 Answers1

0

Ignoring the word 'rudimentary' for a moment. Here is a question about using code analysis, and other tools, to find 'unused code' or 'unreferenced classes'

Find unused code

Without tools, just delete stuff at random and see if the errors list is suddenly populated. Tougher in c#, due to lazy parsing.

Davesoft
  • 724
  • 1
  • 4
  • 10
  • OK, thank you very much for taking your time to answer! I didn't know that the terms "unused code" or "dead code" were used for this. But I started looking into it! I used your link and I kept reading. – PhysicistEngineer Jun 14 '18 at 19:13