I like to use: Provides ....
or Enables ... It is all about focusing on the responsibilities and collaborators. The first C is already what I am documenting. So I do not write the name of the class in the comment. As I reuse/refactor names tend to get wrong. Le 29 avr. 2015 16:07, "Ben Coman" <[email protected]> a écrit : > +1 -- I always liked the first person feel I got from Smalltalk class > comments. You might add something like comments should be written in "first > person from the perspective of the class" > > -0.5 -- Maybe the third person CRC style is better for external > documentation (?) > > cheers -ben > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> The class comment template begins: "For the Class part: State the name of >> the class with one line description: For example, I'm xxx the root of the >> hierarchy of visitor objects." >> >> Unlike a traditional CRC card, we are already in a live programming >> environment with good tools! So the class name is duplicated info (the >> browser already shows this) which will have to be manually changed on a >> class rename. Also, the specific example provides an implementation detail >> duplicated by the class hierarchy tree already shown in the browser. I'd >> like to change it to: "For the Class part: State a one line summary. For >> example, "I represent a paragraph of text."" >> >> Any objections? >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Class-Comment-Template-Suggestion-tp4822890.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >
