The code should speak for itself. If it needs comments, it's badly written.
All opinions welcome! :) But anyway, my point was that the "garbage code" is held to much higher standards as an accurate representation of reality than any comments are. They can still add useful additional context, though. I didn't want to suggest that they didn't.https://twitter.com/bcdannyboy/status/1095685538638635009 …
-
-
-
That only pans out for sound languages with some notion of referential transparency and purity. Scala, not being a pure language, can have any number of side-effecting behaviors not included in the type signature. Your aphorism only applies in a sublanguage of Scala.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Comment the idiosyncrasies and what can't be gleaned from the type signature. Otherwise, this is Daniel:pic.twitter.com/QrR4P3VyqY
-
I use comments to explain the rationale behind the code, but mostly to apologize to the maintainer
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Garbage code should not be commented - it should be refactored to the point where comments are no longer necessary.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
FWIW I've seen worse things
-
and I don't agree with the absolutism of the original statement, although I understand that it's an appealing point to make :) I love comments that explain intent and context, wrt comments that explain code.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think he was joking
-
There's a comment elsewhere in this about jokes not being funny if they have to be explained... but this is all getting so self-referential now, I'm losing track and I'm no longer sure if the joke's on me or not... ;)
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.