> On 9 Feb 2018, at 12:04, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys
> From now on I will VETO the introduction of code where methods are not
> I'm FEDUP FEDUP FEDUP to spend my time commenting methods that I do
> not know and understand, juts because the original author thought that
> this is obvious.
> NOTHING IS OBVIOUS!!!!
> So I will check if we can have a little process that systematically
> reject code without enough method comments.
> Pharo should grow and pharoers too.
> PS: now you can comment that x said that method should be
> self-explanatory. This is bullshit. I'm not asking for stupid
> comments! I'm asking for respect for maintainers and other
The same goes for class comments too, duh.
One problem is that it is hard to check the quality/meaning of the comment.
"Comment later" would probably pass any check, as would "I am class XYZ".
"Returns the receiver's name"
Would also pass a simple test, while it is quite useless.
I would say that any public, non-trivial methods need a comment.
So human judgement will be needed.