22 Mar
2018
22 Mar
'18
4:22 p.m.
so if you had an 11/45 with dual RKO5s back in the day with their massive
storage capacity, then you had source and your system with source and docs
could run out of L2 cache in a modern cheapo IOT board.
Now wouldn't that be a hoot. But how would we simulate pulling the RK05
cartridge out of the drive?
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 8:05 AM Steve Simon <steve(a)quintile.net> wrote:
on the commenting subject, and as it was Shannon’s anniversary recently...
i always felt information theory relates well to comments.
i.e. repeating anything i can see from the code (like “returns void”)
tells me nothing.
telling me something non-obvious (“allocate one more for end of list
sentinel”) really helps.
-Steve
On 22 Mar 2018, at 01:27, Larry McVoy
<lm(a)mcvoy.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 07:58:11PM -0500, Andy Kosela wrote:
> They also state: "Comments are meant to help the reader of a program.
They
do not
help by saying things the code already plainly says, or by
contradicting the code, or by distracting the reader with elaborate
typographical displays. The best comments aid the understanding of a
program by briefly pointing out salient details or by providing a
larger-scale view of the proceedings."
I so agree with this. Verbose comments suck. Too many comments suck.
Why? Because the code evolves and it's work to evolve the comments
as well. Too many comments means they are not maintained and they
become incorrect.
I *HATE* comments that are not correct, hate that so much that if you did
that we would talk, if you kept doing that, you are fired. No comments
are MUCH better than incorrect comments.
Terseness in comments is good. Comment where it is not obvious what
is going on. And maintain the comments like you maintain the code.
I agree with Dan (I think) that coding is still a craft and getting the
comments right is one of the hardest things to master (and I agree that
Unix did it pretty darn well). No comments suck, too much sucks, just
right is so darn pleasant.
--lm