Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #6504
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: The worth of comments |
| Date | 2011-05-29 12:47 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <94djdoFt6U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <iroadr$3gj$1@reader1.panix.com> <4ddfd9bf$0$49183$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <irooea$kio$2@reader1.panix.com> <roy-84AF4C.09364328052011@news.panix.com> <4de1011f$0$49184$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
Irmen de Jong wrote: > I don't see how that is opposed to what Grant was saying. It's that these 'contracts' > tend to change and that people forget or are too lazy to update the comments to reflect > those changes. However, I can't see that deleting the comment documenting the contract can be the right response to the situation. If the contract comment doesn't match what code does, then there are two possibilities -- the comment is wrong, or the code is wrong. The appropriate response is to find out which one is wrong and fix it. If you simply delete the comment, then you're left with no redundancy to catch the fact that something is wrong. -- Greg
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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