/** * Gets the user **/ fun getUser() { return this.user; }
I’m sorry, I don’t think I understand what’s happening here…
Let me find the sequence diagram…
You need the requirements doc from marketing. Then it will all totally make sense for sure. No cap.
Okay now I get the joke.
I hate these kind of people.By the way, your ``` both need to be on their own, separate line
It renders correctly in my client (Sync), what are you using? I’ll edit it anyway.
It renders correctly on the web as well for me.
But the ``` being on their own line is how to write it properly, as stated this website among many others.
This way, you can put the intended programming language on the same line as the first ```, ensuring proper colour coding!
Ex.
echo "Hello $name\n";
echo "Hello $name\n";
EDIT I checked on mobile, it rendered odd on Jerboa for me:
Now it is fixed:
Yep, I know, but my code isn’t in a real language.
You can also not do it, it was just an additional comment!
Thanks for your code review. :-D
My comments are just the code that didn’t work but I don’t want to delete yet because I might make it work except I never will be cause I already rewrote it so it does.
My old senior used to do this before he got laid off and now I’m charge of code that’s littered with old commented out code and no way to know why it was commented out.
“Don’t delete this, might need it later - JP”
When versioning and feature flags are too hard: just use git and hope for the best
Are you me
Well I hate you all.
Sorry, I just get anxious that I’m suddenly gonna need that code
Hey thanks for reminding me I made a clock squared in blender about 2 years ago
yes there is an error in the image, and no I’m not telling you where it is
at 6 it says 12:30
why do you hate Zoomers?
As a zoomer myself i do find it funny :3
For context on the reference: https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/1but3c2/wait_zoomers_actually_cant_read_analogue_clocks_i/
basically how it feel when a professor requires u comment every single line of code u write to explain it. I know people tend to drop out of real engineering to do programing but an entire 4 years of this bullshit as opposed to just a couple classes sounds way worse than calc 3 or differential equations.
The only problem with courses like calc 3 and differential equations (in my experience, as a mathematician) is that they are cheating somewhat. By cheating I mean relying on inadequate, flawed or entirely omitted proofs. How can the students truly understand something if they are not presented the whole story (or at least reference)?
The good thing about these courses are that there are usually no shortage of relevant exercises!
u could be right calc 3 was alright, pretty fun actually but differential equations i still dont get at all, maybe i should try learn it on my own now with more time and no pressure.
I detested differential equations. However, that was more due to how it was presented than the underlying, surprisingly, beautiful math.
When you ask a Dev to test their own code
Commenting code is a super important habit to get into—it not only helps others understand your thought process but also makes it easier for you to pick up where you left off if you revisit the code later. Plus, well-commented code can significantly reduce the onboarding time for new developers on a project. Remember, comments should explain the “why” behind the code, not just the “what.” For instance, stating why you chose a particular algorithm or data structure can be far more helpful than just labeling it. According to a study by SmartBear, 44% of developers regard poorly documented code as a top cause of project delays, so it’s definitely worth the extra effort!
But it’s also important to learn that comments should be brief and concise. We have one file from an ex-dev in which there are 750 lines of code and 2000 lines of comment, when someone wants to maintain this code they always have a hard time because this many comments are taking up so much screen real estate that you can’t find the code that actually does stuff
Gotta get a 4k monitor
I only have a 3k monitor, and I can manage it. Sometimes I comment line-by-line even.
Made a comment
Asking as a newbie programmer: how do you suggest we write comments that explain the ‘why’ part of the code? I understand writing comments explaining the ‘what’ part makes them redundant, but I feel like writing it the former way isn’t adding much help either. I mean, if I created code for a clock, is writing “It helps tell what time it is” better than writing “It is a clock” ?
It would really help if someone could give a code snippet that clearly demonstrates how commenting the ‘correct’ way is clearly better than the way we are used to.
I recognize three kinds of comments that have different purposes.
The first kind are doc block comments. These are the ones that appear above functions, classes, class properties, methods. They usually have a distinct syntax with tags, like:
/* * A one-line description of this function's job. * * Extra details that get more specific about how to use this function correctly, if needed. * * @param {Type} param1 * @param {Type} param2 * returns {Type} */ function aFunctionThatDoesAThing(param1, param2) { // ... }
The primary thing this is used for is automatic documentation generators. You run a program that scans your codebase, looks for these special comments, and automatically builds a set of documentation that you could, say, publish directly to a website. IDEs can also use them for tooltip popups. Generally, you want to write these like the reader won’t have the actual code to read. Because they might not!
The second kind is standalone comments. They take up one or more lines all to themselves. I look at these like warning signs. When there’s something about the upcoming chunk of code that doesn’t tell the whole story obviously by itself. Perhaps something like:
/* The following code is written in a weird way on purpose. I tried doing <obvious way>, but it causes a weird bug. Please do not refactor it, it will break. */
Sometimes it’s tempting to use a standalone comment to explain what dense, hard-to-read code is doing. But ideally, you’d want to shunt it off to a function named what it does instead, with a descriptive doc comment if you can’t cram it all into a short name. Alternatively, rewrite the code to be less confusing. If you literally need the chunk of code to be in its confusing form, because a less confusing way doesn’t exist or doesn’t work, then this kind of comment explaining why is warranted.
The last kind are inline comments. More or less the same use case as above, the only difference being they appear on the same line as code, usually at the very end of the line:
dozen = 12 + 1; // one extra for the baker!
In my opinion, these comments have the least reason to exist. Needing one tends to be a signal of a code smell, where the real answer is just rewriting the code to be clearer. They’re also a bit harder to spot, being shoved at the ends of lines. Especially true if you don’t enforce maximum line length rules in your codebase. But that’s mostly personal preference.
There’s technically a fourth kind of comment: commented-out code. Where you select a chunk of code and convert it to a comment to “soft-delete” it, just in case you may want it later. I highly recommend against this. This is what version control software like Git is for. If you need it again, just roll back to it. Don’t leave it to rot in your codebase taking up space in your editor and being an eyesore.
dozen = 12 + 1; // one extra for the baker!
I got mad at this when I first saw it but then I remembered there’s some code at work that defines an hour as 50 minutes
Wdym, that’s a standard work hour
My comment game has gotten far better since I started doing live code reviews. Essentially I ask myself, “Would I feel the need to explain this to someone during a code review?” and if the answer is yes I add a comment.
“tells the user the current time” would be an excellent comment for a clock
I’m not the best at commenting my code, but generally I just try to think of what information I’d want to know if looking at this 10 years from now
Imo comments are best used sparingly, don’t bother commenting something that anyone with a basic understanding of programming would understand straight away by reading the code
Functions should generally be commented with what parameters are and what they’re for, plus what they output
use reqwest::Client; // create a http client class that all other files can import // so as to only create one instance globally pub struct HttpClient { client: Client, } impl HttpClient { pub fn new() -> Self { HttpClient { client: Client::new(), } } pub fn client(&self) -> &Client { &self.client } }
Here’s an example where if I were to stumble onto this file 10 years from now, I might think wtf is this looking at it out of context, the comment explains why it exists and what it’s used for
(we’ll ignore the fact I totally didn’t just add this comment because I suck at commenting personal projects)
IMO, the most important parts are to document the actual intent of the code. The contract of what is being documented. Sure, it’s only so useful in perfectly written code, but NO code is perfect, and few will come through later with full context already learned.
It makes it sooo mich easier to know what is intended behavior and what is an unchecked edge case or an unexpected problem. If it’s a complicated thing with a lot of fallout, good documentation can save hours of manually lining up consequences and checking through them for sanity.
You might say, “but that’s indication of bad code!”. No. Not really. Consequences easily extend past immediate code doing things as trivial as saving data to the database without filtering, or having a publicly available service. Even perfectly coded things come up with vulnerabilities all the time due to underlying security issues. It’s always great to have an immediate confirmation of what’s supposed to happen whether it’s immediate code or some library with a new quirk in a new version.
“Why” comments make more sense as application complexity grows.
You also have to consider interaction of the code with other external systems - sometimes external APIs force you to write code in ways you might not otherwise and it’s good to leave a trail for others on your team (and your future self…) about what was going on there.
100%. I also like to leave comments on bug fixes. Generally the more difficult the fix was to find, the longer the comment. On a couple gnarly ones we have multiple paragraphs of explanation for a single line of code.
I often use comments as ways to say, “I know this is cursed, but here’s why the obvious solution won’t work.” Like so:
/** * The column on this table is badly named, but * renaming it is going to require an audit of our * db instances because we used to create them * by hand and there are some inconsistencies * that referential integrity breaks. This method * just does some basic checks and translates the * model’s property to be more understandable. * See [#27267] for more info. */
Edit: to answer your question more directly, the “why not what” advice is more about the intent of whether to write a comment or not in the first place rather than rephrasing the existing “what” style comments. What code is doing should be clear based on names of variables and functions. Why it’s doing that may be unclear, which is why you would write a comment.
Removed by mod
I know I’m probably doing it wrong but this is how I feel whenever I write unit tests
@Vordimous Wait for daylight saving time…
Is that when all of the devs write the comments on the line after the code?
@Vordimous @linuxgal when I see this sort of thing when reviewing PRs, I write words to the effect of “tell me WHY it’s doing that, not WHAT it’s doing”. The “what” is usually obvious from the code and thus not worthy of comment. The “why” will enlighten your colleagues (and future you).
Self-explainable, when you aren’t writing spaghetti Perl scripts.
//forgive my sins, it took me 2 hours to nail down this arcane spell. if anyone touches this they will know my wrath
=(/&)((//((%=)(&)%)(&()
Checked one of mine:
# get path to the download directory
Oh, ok.
The code directly below:
function getPathToUploadDirectory() { return config.tmp_path }
I like to include profanity in all my comments for spiciness.