I fully agree with PMario.

Code is already abstract as far as I am concerned. Having to add complexity 
to get simplicity doesn't sound right.

Personally I'm crap at programming without copious inline comments since I 
quickly forget what does what without them. 
TW doesn't easily allow comments in code. Often its unworkable. 

I accept its part of my failure at getting better at it. But Mat's 
"solution" looks awkward and baroque IMO.
Non-starter for me, I think :-(. Sorry.

TT

On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 13:46:50 UTC+2, PMario wrote:
>
> Hi Mat, 
>
> A nice idea! ... But pardon me, being so harsh: It won't work. ... 
>
> As a developer I'd rather risk a performance hit using inline comments 
> than maintaining 2 different sources of truth. Keeping them in sync will 
> always fail.
>
> -----------
>
> What would be possible is a "pre-compile" step  while building TW. But 
> this would only be available for a node based TW development setup, where 
> the comments would automagically create a "comments-library" that could be 
> imported to annotate the source code. 
>
> This annotation would need a special editor, that can handle the 
> additional info. ... All of this "solutions" are way to complicated. So at 
> the end I personally would go with "no comments" but proper indentation, 
> which make the code more readable. 
>
> Creating PRs with, *backwards compatible*, indented core files *and *getting 
> the changes merged is hard enough.
>
> -mario
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/7e6021e9-09a8-4304-ac7c-5f26e721d14d%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to