Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

blog.desdelinux.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 221 posts

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#81

Post by IshKebab »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55
whoopdedo wrote: post #37

From the research paper: > we calculate the swear factor as the number of swearwords divided by the lines of code That's what I suspected. Assuming that most swear words will be contained in comments, what this is actually measuring is the ratio of comments to code. In other words, code that is more heavily commented is better. I think we already knew this. That said I would like to see a more critical analysis. Firs…

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

No, that is stupid. People just don't want you to write comments like

    // Set foo to true
    foo = true;
Somebody saw one too many comments like that and overreacted. As long as you a) don't write comments describing what is self evident from the code, and b) try to make the code as descriptive as possible, then it's fine. Comment away.

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#82

Post by bravetraveler »

flatline wrote: post #63
mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

It really depends on the comments. Best practice is to comment “why” something was done, not “what” is being done, or “how”. Every programmer can read code, most code should be pretty self-explanatory. But in any sufficiently complex routine, there are going to be some things that a programmer struggled to get working the first time, that they had to work around, or that was simply unintuitive. These should be commen…

"Why" is a really good way to put it, like you say - doing "What" just repeats something a novice, possibly even a layman, could distinguish.

I tend to treat them like a strange hybrid of a story with editor's notes.

Here's where we're going... but oh no! Something is in the way. We need this critical, but painful to acquire shovel.

If I anticipate even the slightest bit of refactoring around it, I'm noting what devilishness lead me down this path.

TLDR: anything that could be abstracted away/not exist, probably deserves comments on why it does... perhaps even how it could be removed.

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#83

Post by bawolff »

bitofhope wrote: post #26
bawolff wrote: post #5

I'd bet a lot of the non-profanity code is people open sourcing code just to be impressive on resumes or for school, where the profanity code is probably real code. Sounds likely to be a classic case of correlation != causation

Rorschach test for programmers: give your confident gut feeling explanation for this phenomenon. I'll do mine: there's likely a correlation between needing to maintain a professional conduct which includes forgoing foul language (you're programming at work) and writing code under time pressure where getting a product ready for release is more important than strict adherence to clean programming practice (you're progr…

This seems unlikely to be true in this case because the study was looking at github projects, and it seems unlikely the sample had enough code from "uptight" work places, to have an affect one way or another

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#84

Post by vezuchyy »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55
whoopdedo wrote: post #37

From the research paper: > we calculate the swear factor as the number of swearwords divided by the lines of code That's what I suspected. Assuming that most swear words will be contained in comments, what this is actually measuring is the ratio of comments to code. In other words, code that is more heavily commented is better. I think we already knew this. That said I would like to see a more critical analysis. Firs…

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

If you have a process where every commit is well documented, you don't need much comments since you can rely on whatever is your analogue for git blame. It's not a lack of comments, it's actually the opposite but aside from the code base.

When I worked at SAP where VCS for ABAP is ancient and has no analogue for git blame we had a practice of putting a SAP Note next to every code change, since some of the things that we had to implement are dictated by business/legislation, so you need a proper explanation from time to time. Without it, the code becomes unmaintainable.

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#85

Post by smrtinsert »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55
whoopdedo wrote: post #37

From the research paper: > we calculate the swear factor as the number of swearwords divided by the lines of code That's what I suspected. Assuming that most swear words will be contained in comments, what this is actually measuring is the ratio of comments to code. In other words, code that is more heavily commented is better. I think we already knew this. That said I would like to see a more critical analysis. Firs…

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

I get where they are going with it - every block of code should probably be obvious and final since it has one item to do well. Unfortunately there are always times when n random fields will be used for a conditional that is completely non-obvious. Comments will always be necessary to some degree.

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#86

Post by dylan604 »

flatline wrote: post #63
mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

It really depends on the comments. Best practice is to comment “why” something was done, not “what” is being done, or “how”. Every programmer can read code, most code should be pretty self-explanatory. But in any sufficiently complex routine, there are going to be some things that a programmer struggled to get working the first time, that they had to work around, or that was simply unintuitive. These should be commen…

in procedurally written scripts, i write "what" comments as an outline or roadmap. i also use # vs // differently where the // style designates these what so i can find next to jump to next section. if i ever get away from being a solo dev and work as part of a team, there'll be a lot of unlearning personal habits

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#87

Post by yongjik »

Sorry for being off topic, but let me introduce you to the only true metric of code quality: WTF/minute.

https://www.osnews.com/story/19266/wtfsm/

One wonders if profanity in the source code interferes with reviewers and skews this important metric ...

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#88

Post by dylan604 »

jacobsenscott wrote: post #74
paxys wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an idiotic policy and definitely not something that is industry standard. Code gets out of date as well, so let's just stop writing it altogether..

Even better, lets triple the work and require UML diagrams, comments, and code to all be in sync at all times!

you left out keeping the docs in sync as well

Re: Open source code with profanity in comments is statistically better

#89

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

vezuchyy wrote: post #84
mr_00ff00 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t commented code no longer considered a good idea in most companies? I used to work for a bank and the policy is no comments unless absolutely necessary, because comments become out of date. Doxygen is the only real comments allowed.

If you have a process where every commit is well documented, you don't need much comments since you can rely on whatever is your analogue for git blame. It's not a lack of comments, it's actually the opposite but aside from the code base. When I worked at SAP where VCS for ABAP is ancient and has no analogue for git blame we had a practice of putting a SAP Note next to every code change, since some of the things that…

That requires everyone to have access to the repo, and to wade through it looking for changes to the relevant area of code you're working in. That sucks.
Post reply on HN