One more reason to do reviews. Now that it is super easy with iceberg there is less reason to do so.
Norbert > Am 09.02.2018 um 12:10 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu>: > > > >> 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 >> commented. >> 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. >> >> Stef >> >> 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 >> programmers. > > +100 > > 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". > > Also, > > name > "Returns the receiver's name" > ^ 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. > > Sven