Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 151517
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T09:27:44+00:00 2026-05-11T09:27:44+00:00

I have read that removing unused references makes no difference to the compiler as

  • 0

I have read that removing unused references makes no difference to the compiler as it ignores assemblies that are not being referenced in the code itself.

But I find it hard to believe because then, what is the real purpose of Removing unused references? It doesn’t have any noticeable effect on the size of the generated assembly or otherwise. Or is this smart behaviour limited to the C# compiler (csc.exe) and not inherent to vbc.exe?

If this functionality is so useless, why does ReSharper offer it as a feature? Why is it provided within the Visual Studio Project Configuration dialog?

The only activity I can think of where this would be useful is during Deployment. References (used or unused) would still be copied by the installer. But for assemblies that reside in the GAC (for instance, BCL assemblies), this would not be a problem either.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. 2026-05-11T09:27:44+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 9:27 am

    It prevents the CLR from loading the referenced module at runtime. This will reduce startup time (since it takes time to load each module). Depending on the size of the module it might noticeably reduce startup time.

    One way to test this is to create a test WinForms project, add a reference to an assembly that isn’t used (e.g., System.Web) then run and attach to the executable (e.g., F5). View the loaded modules (Debug -> Windows -> Modules) and you’ll see the referenced assembly was loaded.

    If you think about it, it would be pretty hard for the CLR to determine whether or not a dependency (it’s in the manifest as a dependency once you add a reference to it) is really used… Especially since the execution of some code paths can’t be known in advance…

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have read that while plug-ins are not supported for SQL Server Management Studio,
I have read in some of the ClickOnce posts that ClickOnce does not allow
I have read that using database keys in a URL is a bad thing
I have read that private variables in a base class are technically inherited by
Apparently I can't move files on different volumes using Directory.Move. I have read that
Everything I have read says that when making a managed stored procedure, to right
I have read a lot that LISP can redefine syntax on the fly, presumably
I have a read query that I execute within a transaction so that I
I have read on Stack Overflow some people that have converting to C#2.0 to
I have read (or perhaps heard from a colleague) that in .NET, TransactionScope can

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.