Jan said: > ...We are in complete agreement...I think.
Yes, I think so too. What much of it comes down to is that code isn't primarily a method for humans to communicate with machines but rather for humans to communicate with humans: themselves, other developers working at the same time, and future developers. I totally agree that having too much "documentation" (in the broad sense of "other stuff that isn't source code") isn't helpful - the trick is getting just the right amount to communicate with maximum clarity. > Unless of course you just start the project as if it were already in > maintenece..... Yes, indeed. Of course, you don't always have that luxury. >> and the initial developers might >> not even be available for consultation. > > Strange how the suspects allways seem to disaper. People move on. What's the mean time spent in a job in the software industry: two or three years? > So Rich, don't blame a lack of documentation for poorly factored code. > Instead of "If these idiots would just have documented...", think "If > these idiots would just have writen Unit Tests or Contracts, written > clear code with short methods and discriptive naming, used codeing > conventions like verticle alignment, used comments when the intent was > not obvious, and documented thier intent in a short and concise > manner." Amen. > Agile Maru Rich VFP Extreme _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
