Timeline for Are outdated comments an urban myth?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2012 at 13:54 | history | edited | Steven Jeuris | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Added a scientific observational study. |
| Apr 20, 2011 at 10:43 | comment | added | SK-logic | yep, I did not include a documentation (e.g., Javadoc) - it is too structured to be called just "comments". | |
| Apr 20, 2011 at 10:22 | comment | added | Steven Jeuris | @SK-logic: Although I understand the argument I believe it's too broad. The comments of a function (or code paragraph/block) can clarify a lot more (and quicker) what the function does than its name. This is especially needed for public functions. As easy as code can be to read, reading a two-liner explanation of 10-liner code is still faster. Imagine working with your favorite API which doesn't have any "what" documentation. You'd be a lot less sure about its functionality. | |
| Apr 20, 2011 at 10:08 | comment | added | SK-logic | @Paul Nathan, comments should never describe what the code does - the code describes that better. Comments are there to explain, why the code does what it does. | |
| Apr 20, 2011 at 5:36 | comment | added | Paul Nathan | As I've become better, I've found I need less comments to grasp what code does in typical plug n chug code. | |
| Apr 19, 2011 at 13:58 | history | answered | Steven Jeuris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |