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

Reply via email to