<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40184 >
Madeline Book wrote: > <URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40184 > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Jun 11 16:51:03 2008]: >> >> I only read sources, not yet tested. >> >> >> - Please don't add new empty function headers. New code should have >> function headers already when committed. > > What do you mean by "empty function header"? If you mean the > > /***************************** > ... > ******************************/ > > Then I only fill that in if the function name is not descriptive > enough or there are some special conditions or side-effects that > programmers need to be aware of (e.g. "you must free the return > value yourself"). > > Do you think I should describe the functions more in the header? Previous discussions have agreed that empty comments are not helpful. It's possible that the function name really says everything about the function; in such a case maybe ... isn't needed. But I really don't see any use to having ... as a comment. -jason _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
