Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #6359

Re: The worth of comments

Show all headers | View raw

Richard Parker <r.richardparker@comcast.net> writes:

> On May 26, 2011, at 4:28 AM, python-list-request@python.org wrote:
>
> > My experience is that comments in Python are of relatively low
> > usefulness. (For avoidance of doubt: not *zero* usefulness, merely
> > low.) I can name variables, functions and classes with sensible,
> > self- documenting names.

I am largely in agreement with this position (including the “not *zero*
usefulness” caveat).

> I'm less inclined to use comments on each line, or selected lines, but
> rather use block comments instead. They require more thought and time
> to write; however, the intended functionality of the code that follows
> can be described in full.

This I disagree with. If a section of code is interesting enough to
deserve an explanation, then it is better to capture it in a
helpfully-named function with its doc string having the explanation.

-- 
 \        “If this is your first visit to the USSR, you are welcome to |
  `\                                          it.” —hotel room, Moscow |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The worth of comments Richard Parker <r.richardparker@comcast.net> - 2011-05-26 11:50 -0700
  Re: The worth of comments Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-27 11:42 +1000
    Re: The worth of comments Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-27 13:54 +0000
      Re: The worth of comments Irmen de Jong <irmen@-NOSPAM-xs4all.nl> - 2011-05-27 19:05 +0200
        Re: The worth of comments Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-27 17:53 +0000
          Re: The worth of comments Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2011-05-28 15:09 +0200
            Re: The worth of comments python@bdurham.com - 2011-05-28 09:34 -0400
          Re: The worth of comments Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-28 09:36 -0400
            Re: The worth of comments Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-29 00:02 +1000
            Re: The worth of comments Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2011-05-28 16:05 +0200
              Re: The worth of comments Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2011-05-29 12:47 +1200
                Re: The worth of comments Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-29 11:41 +1000
                Re: The worth of comments Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2011-05-29 23:05 +1200
                Re: The worth of comments Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-29 14:43 +0000
                Re: The worth of comments Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-29 11:39 -0400
                Re: The worth of comments Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2011-05-29 03:49 +0200
                Re: The worth of comments Alister Ware <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2011-05-29 17:26 +0000
            Re: The worth of comments Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2011-05-31 14:47 +0000
  Re: The worth of comments Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-26 22:08 -0400
    Re: The worth of comments Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-27 15:13 +1000
      Re: The worth of comments Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-27 09:25 -0400
    Re: The worth of comments Tim Roberts <timr@probo.com> - 2011-05-27 00:02 -0700
      Re: The worth of comments "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-27 09:29 -0400
    RE: The worth of comments "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmchase.com> - 2011-05-27 14:17 -0400

csiph-web