I am actually a lot more of a proponent of videos for one-offs that doing
something on a recurring basis. But there is often just so much that needs
to be covered that a single 1-3 hours talk has never been enough.
FWIW, I wasn't originally thinking that individual developers would
> create videos
WRT video documentation - I have tried a trick that I think I learned
from one of Alistair Cockburn's books.
Give an hour-long talk on the topic (architecture, design, whatever)
to several of your target audience (other devs, customers etc) and
record it. Then have a Q&A session with the audience,
re: architecture comments. I agree that there is always a sense of
scope: reviewing and understanding small scope (e.g. a class or a
method) is relatively easy. The larger scope is difficult.
In my experience, teams talk in terms of layers, and the good ones are
careful to maintain a sense of int
Vineet,
> videos from development teams might just be too hard - teams don't
> comment/document enough often (or more accurately don't necessarily know
> what is worth documenting). So what if developers could easy get to
FWIW, I wasn't originally thinking that individual developers would
create
I think the discussion here is more than just code comments - it is about
architecture comments. Code comments help, so shouldn't architecture
comments of some form help as well. Yes, that means figuring out what
architecture comments are, and what you can do to have them not be a burden
- but I am
No, I fix bad code, then I don't comment it, because the vast majority of
code that fits the 'this is within 10% of as good as it could be written'
doesn't need comments.
Comments cannot be unit tested and thus can flow into a buggy (i.e. no
longer relevant or even actively misleading) state, a
I only comment code that needs commenting, for a particular value of 'need'.
2011/2/1 Ricky Clarkson
> I only comment bad code.
>
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Vince O'Sullivan
> wrote:
> > On Feb 1, 2:20 am, Michael Easter wrote:
> >> My question: why not use video?
> >
> > If you can't g
We have been thinking about this a fair bit. My thought is that asking for
videos from development teams might just be too hard - teams don't
comment/document enough often (or more accurately don't necessarily know
what is worth documenting). So what if developers could easy get to
architectural ov
Sometimes you may leave a hack in place that works but is dodgy, then
when you know how to remove it, go back and remove it. In the
meantime, a comment is useful.
2011/2/1 Cédric Beust ♔ :
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Ricky Clarkson
> wrote:
>>
>> I only comment bad code.
>
> I don't co
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Ricky Clarkson wrote:
> I only comment bad code.
>
I don't comment bad code, I fix it. Then I comment it.
--
Cédric
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javapo
I am thinking more of a high-level architecture overview by the team
lead. IMO, a 1-hour whiteboard talk, done every 4-6 months, would be
of genuine value.
It wouldn't help with specific corners of the code, but it would help
to understand the culture.
In a comment, Alex Miller mentions that Ter
I only comment bad code.
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Vince O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Feb 1, 2:20 am, Michael Easter wrote:
>> My question: why not use video?
>
> If you can't get people to comment their code, I doubt you'll get them
> to video it.
>
> --
> You received this message because you
On Feb 1, 2:20 am, Michael Easter wrote:
> My question: why not use video?
If you can't get people to comment their code, I doubt you'll get them
to video it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email
Just don't mention the #nopants up front.
On Feb 1, 12:24 pm, Steven Herod wrote:
> Agreed, I've often thought about recording walkthroughs of code or
> project introductions, but most people seem to recoil at the
> thought...
>
> On Feb 1, 1:20 pm, Michael Easter wrote:
>
>
>
> > I enjoyed Epis
Agreed, I've often thought about recording walkthroughs of code or
project introductions, but most people seem to recoil at the
thought...
On Feb 1, 1:20 pm, Michael Easter wrote:
> I enjoyed Episode 338, esp. near the 19:30 mark where someone (?)
> referred to software archaeology as the main ch
15 matches
Mail list logo
