Yes and no.
If it's his production code no, but if it's a how-to or
something that goes in a wiki, it should leave no details
uncovered.
It is better to be over-documented, than under. Also, I would
use the full package name on objects. Nothing is more fun than
trying to figure out an object when it's in more than one
package (like ALL the client certificate code) or it's in some
library that you have never seen.
--- Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Murray Collingwood wrote:
>
> >I agree with Frank, we all started with Java/Struts somewhere
> and back then the more
> >comments in the code made it so much easier for us to
> understand.
> >
> If you're documenting functionality, I totally agree.
>
> If you're commenting "inputStream.read(xxx)" with "read in the
> bytes" I
> couldn't disagree more.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Norris Shelton
Software Engineer
Sun Certified Java 1.1 Programmer
Appriss, Inc.
ICQ# 26487421
AIM NorrisEShelton
YIM norrisshelton
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
