Re: Python-list Digest, Vol 92, Issue 221

References	<mailman.8469.1306366341.9058.python-list@python.org> <F6DB2229-6123-4C1A-AFAE-1342DEAC841A@comcast.net>
Date	2011-05-26 14:06 +1000
Subject	Re: Python-list Digest, Vol 92, Issue 221
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.2107.1306382819.9059.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Richard Parker
<r.richardparker@comcast.net> wrote:
> It's time to stop having flame wars about languages and embrace programmers
> who care enough about possible future readers of their code to thoroughly
> comment it. Comments are far more valuable than the actual language in which
> the code is written, IMHO.

The problem with comments (and documentation in general) is that they
are often imperfect. If the code is absolutely opaque but it has a
comment next to it, you still have that niggling doubt: has the
comment been updated whenever the code has? Was it even accurate in
the first place? (Comments often say what a piece of code _ought_ to
do, but the code might have a bug in it. And sometimes, that bug ends
up being part of the function's definition, and people depend on it.)
I'd rather have both - reasonably readable code AND a comment, where
the comment explains the intent behind the code.

// allow space for frobnostication
height += BTN_HEIGHT;

Chris Angelico

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

Thread

Re: Python-list Digest, Vol 92, Issue 221 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 14:06 +1000
  Re: Python-list Digest, Vol 92, Issue 221 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-26 10:07 +0000
    Re: Python-list Digest, Vol 92, Issue 221 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 20:25 +1000

csiph-web