Miretpl commented on code in PR #73359:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73359#discussion_r4054721145
##########
AGENTS.md:
##########
@@ -134,7 +134,14 @@ reported as such are described in "What is NOT considered
a security vulnerabili
- **Always format and check Python files with ruff immediately after writing
or editing them:** `uv run ruff format <file_path>` and `uv run ruff check
--fix <file_path>`. Do this for every Python file you create or modify, before
moving on to the next step.
- No `assert` in production code.
-- **Comment sparingly — code says *what*, comments say *why*.** Add a comment
only when the reasoning is non-obvious and cannot be carried by a clear name or
the code itself. Do not write narrating comments that restate the next line, do
not pad logic with multi-line prose, and do not repeat the same rationale at
several sites — put one concise note at the source of truth and let the others
stand on their own. Tests whose names already describe intent need no
explanatory comment. Reserve longer explanation for genuinely complex or
non-obvious logic (e.g. a security check whose threat model isn't apparent),
and keep even that as tight as it can be. Over-commenting is noise that ages
badly and obscures the code it wraps.
+- **Comment only when context is not readily apparent from the code.**
+ Generic purpose explanation do not qualify: `# Log for debugging` above
`logging.debug(...)`,
+ `# Validate for safety`, and `# Retry for reliability` and similar, provide
no useful information.
Review Comment:
```suggestion
`# Validate for safety`, `# Retry for reliability` and similar provide no
useful information.
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
