On Jul 13, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Dana Jansens <dan...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:57 AM, Stephen Chenney <schen...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > I don't doubt there are poor comments, both outdated and useless. That's a > reviewing failure. You have simply highlighted the fact that any standard for > comments requires reviewer attention. Hence "cost of maintaining comments". > > I don't know how to review a patch and make sure all relevant comments are > updated. > > As I have illustrated before, you can be modifying a function X, then a > completely random function A which calls B that in turn calls C that in turns > D ... that in turn calls X may have a comment dependent on the previous > behavior of X without ever mentioning X. How am I supposed to know that there > is such a comment? > > How is that different than the same question but replace "comment" with > "behaviour"? In both cases A is no longer doing what it expected. Something > is going to break, and A will have to be fixed/updated, comment included. Wrong behavior can often be observed through automated testing. Wrong comments cannot. - Maciej
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
