Philip Brown writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > As a consequence of assuming that nobody else is looking right at a > > function, you're free to rewrite it at will in any way you want, > > without having to consult with *anyone* or do any grep or cscope or > > google searches to locate other users. > > > > If you had to do searches like that every time you changed a variable > > name, you'd never get anything done. > > I agree there. What I'm suggesting, is only a "code comments" level of > documentation, though.
In that case, I think you might be misinformed about what "private" means in the context of architectural review. It means that it's not documented such that someone outside of the project or consolidation can use it. It does not mean that it's secret. It does not mean that it doesn't have adequate documentation for the purpose for which it's intended. The "private" status has _nothing_ to do with code comments, detailed design documents, bug fix evaluations, or quality. It's entirely true that some designers and implementors may leave out comments that you feel are necessary or may fail to produce adequate design information. That's an important issue, but it is NOT architectural, and isn't really a problem for this list. Instead, pay attention to project reviews and bring the issue up with the designers involved (if it's an ongoing project that concerns you) or file bugs (if it's existing integrated code that has flaws). -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
