=?utf-8?b?0JjQs9C90LDRgiDQodC10YDQsw=?=, =?utf-8?b?0JjQs9C90LDRgiDQodC10YDQsw=?Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123...@github.com>
bartlettroscoe wrote: Hello @IgnatSergeev, thanks for your response! I am looping in my colleague @achauphan who has been working with the LLVM Clang refactoring tooling ... > But to be honest, i think that there are't many "users" for large refactoring > tools, so when they are needed people write small portion of their own > transformations, thus they don't get to open source I just find that so surprising. It is so hard to even safely change the name of an overloaded function across a large C++ code base. And performing Extract Function can be very tedious to do it correctly with minimal inputs/outputs, dealing with multiple returns, etc. Is this a chicken and the egg problem? I mean, do they not use the refactoring tools because the refactoring tools don't exist or are not reliable so they don't use them? Or is it because they don't do refactoring as a regular practice? I asked ChatGPT 4o the question: > Why do software developers not use automated source code refactoring tools > more? and it provided the following summary response (see [here](https://chatgpt.com/c/68128757-e3e0-800f-9d10-f5a14a4ee1f7)): > Developers often avoid automated refactoring tools due to lack of trust, poor > integration, workflow disruption, or organizational inertia. For tools to > gain adoption, they must be safe, fast, unobtrusive, and deeply integrated > into the developer's natural environment. All it would take is one or two bad refactors from a refactoring tool and I think many people will just give up. I have never had access to a working refactoring tool for C++ so I have zero experience with such tooling. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123782 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
