> This is the excuse continually trotted out by people too lazy to > comment, or who think themselves superior to merely mortal programmers > who have to work in teams and actually communicate with people. > Redundancy in communication is almost never redundant; think of it as > a checksum. <snip>....
A checksum should be trusted. Comments sometimes cannot. Since you brought up the issue with working in teams, I will submit my decade and a half of experience coding in 'enterprise' team environments (my chosen hell). I have built upon and maintained Java code that has grown through accretion of various consulting organizations, and I never trust comments. Even with third party (supposedly stable) APIs, I have had (more than once) to open up the code to discover that the javadocs are out of date and incorrect. I do my bit; I try to maintain my comments, but I never trust. The code IS the answer, always. > 'Redundant comments are useless' is the mantra of the dilettante, the > amateur, and the cowboy. I believe the मन्त्र 'comments are useless' is more cowboy-like, not 'redundant comments are useless'. If not, what about the phrase 'useless comments are useless'? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
