I would say that the comments should be less concerned about the "what" and more concerned about the "why" (unless they are javadoc) , leaving the "how" and most of the "what" to the code itself.
On Apr 16, 8:57 am, Matt Scully <scull...@gmail.com> wrote: > The only thing I would add is that comments describe what the code did > at a single point in time and the code itself describes what it did. > I always appreciate a helpful comment, but I give preference to > renaming variables and extracting methods before adding comments. One > helpful comment is referencing a bug number that can then be looked up > with details about a specific problem that was fixed in the code. As > an analogy I think of Wikipedia. Most comments are like articles > without references: they are likely true but the reader gets a false > sense of confidence since in reality it is just one person's > perspective (although that doesn't mean it's not helpful). This is > where a comment with a bug ID is like an article with references :) > > --matt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
