If your code needs comments, it's either because it's unnecessarily complex/convoluted, or because there's more thought in it (e.g. complex mathematic operations, or edge-cases etc.). Comments just often don't age well IME, and when people are "forced" to read the (hopefully readable) code, they will more likely understand what is really happening, and the relevant design decisions.

Good video I really recommend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf7vDBBOBUA

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That's like saying a book's synopsis shouldn't exist because you can just read the whole book. Sometimes comments can save you a lot of time and point you in the right direction.

[–] philm 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah, it's not, code is modular (IME should be kinda tree-structured), a book is linear.

So the API should be in your analogy the synopsis. And I haven't said, that there shouldn't be any comments. E.g. doc-comments above functions, explaining the use-cases and showing examples are good practice.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Books can be modular as well (ever heard of "Rayuela" by Cortazar?) But that's beside the point. The analogy is fine and it works.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (40 replies)