On Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 9:11:45 PM UTC+8 hen...@topoi.pooq.com 

> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 09:33:01PM -0700, Alex Harsanyi wrote: 
> ... 
> ... 
> > I think Racket would benefit by a suite of applications which are small 
> but 
> > not trivial and with a source code which is commented in more detail 
> than a 
> > regular application. 
> Every regular application would also benefit from being commented in 
> this much detail. 

Whenever you write a comment, you usually have an intended reader in mind 
(this happens even if you are not conscious about it).  For a comment in an 
application code base, the intended readers are the application developers, 
so you tend to assume that they already know (1) the language constructs 
and conventions, (2) the problem domain and (3) the application 
architecture.  Such a comment would be useless to someone who is trying to 
learn the programming language or learn the application architecture.

Than, there is the question of effort required to write these comments.  It 
took me significantly longer to write the programs that I linked to, 
because I wanted to structure them in ways that are easier to understand by 
a broader set of users,  Still, I did not explain what `define` or function 
application is, so I left out the absolute beginners.    For small programs 
and blog posts, this is workable, for larger programs I don't think it is 
-- this is why introductory material at various expertise levels is still 


> -- hendrik 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 

Reply via email to