On 2/22/2010 7:00 PM, Nick Schultz wrote: > Perhaps there should be an enforcement of better commenting standards on > submitted code. This might reduce the load of questions being asked by the > community as they can understand the code better and increase the amount of > users who can answer them effectively. Obviously the tricky part is how much > better is "better" and what is "good enough?" That can be another discussion. > > Another question arises, how do we better comment/document the current code > base we have now? Well that can be up to the community, you can let it be > known that OSG is currently looking to improve its documentation and users > who find themselves stepping through code to understand various sections, to > take the time (time they are already spending walking through and tracing > code) and add comments where needed (preferably the parts that confused > them). I know for myself, when I was trying to learn some parts of the code, > thought that some parts could have been documented better. The OSG > quickstart guide was very helpful in my understanding of OSG.
We have tried to conduct an OSG spelling/grammar commenting drive in the past with some success. We can continue this. > Nick -- Chris 'Xenon' Hanson, omo sanza lettere Xenon AlphaPixel.com PixelSense Landsat processing now available! http://www.alphapixel.com/demos/ "There is no Truth. There is only Perception. To Perceive is to Exist." - Xen _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
