Live data from Hacker News

CodeThatDocumentsItselfSoWellItDoesNotNeedComments

thedailywtf.com

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: CodeThatDocumentsItselfSoWellItDoesNotNeedComments

#11
post #3

I would rather support that, than most of the code I've actually been asked to support.

Here here. EDIT: Hear, hear.

a) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear

b) The little triangular "upmod" button is perfectly sufficient to express your agreement if you don't have anything else to add.

Re: CodeThatDocumentsItselfSoWellItDoesNotNeedComments

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm... spam? I don't get it.

Quite possibly an arch way of saying that DailyWTF postings are a little lowbrow for HN?

Ah.... true.

Just a second....

"arch" adj - deliberately or affectedly playful and teasing.

Upvoted for teaching me a new word usage. ;)

Re: CodeThatDocumentsItselfSoWellItDoesNotNeedComments

#19
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really all that difficult to throw in a comment explaining what it is you're trying to do when it's not obvious to someone other than yourself?

Eliminating _all_ comments is a little extreme, but if faced with the choice between excessively long names and insufficiently descriptive names, I'll go with excessively long every time. I've spent way too many months digging around in Fortran code where every variable and function name was less than eight characters (actually the eight-character limit has been gone since Fortran 77, but some people still insist on…

Was the code commented in enough detail? At work, we comment heavily and tend to use short variable names (especially local variables) so I'd like to know of outside experiences with similar code.
Post reply on HN