And your colleagues are probably correct with respect to this sort of «what it does» commenting. That can be counterproductive because if the code changes and the comment isn’t updated accordingly, it can be ambiguous. Better have the code be the singular source of truth. However, «why it does it» comments are another story and usually accepted by most as helpful.
theherk
joined 1 year ago
Gaddammit! That’s gonna be in my head again for 5 more years. I had forgotten about it. I HAD FORGOTTEN!
Thank goodness you didn’t say Jack Johnson.
I’d improvise one on the spot. just to prevent the erasure of others’ art. Nah, fuck that; Baby Shark can die.
I hope they at least towed it outside the environment.
No I’m Spartacus.
The books will likely please you for one reason alone. The Laconia story line that the show didn’t make it to.
Also anybody that loves The Expanse should check out the Bobiverse.
It really forks the llamas ass!
The joke only being enhanced by the fact that most of us will never retire.
But how do you eat apples? I eat the whole thing, ass first, pit and all.
view more: next ›
I didn’t say the source of failure. I said a source of ambiguity. And having also been in the industry for decades, I have encountered it many times, where a junior programmer or somebody new to a project read some documentation and assumed a behavior which in fact did not match the current implementation. So you may have been fortunate, but your experience is certainly not ubiquitous.
With respect to variable names, I’d suggest those too should absolutely be updated too if the name is given in a way that adds ambiguity.
I’m not saying comments are bad; rather that bad comments are bad, and sometimes worse than no comment.