[wp-hackers] Re: 1.5.2 or on to 1.6?

[Ryan King]

On May 23, 2005, at 5:14 AM, Martin Geisler wrote:
>
> And the idea that there can be such a thing as well-written code
> containing no comments is bogus: it is only in small toy examples that
> the function and argument names are enough to determine what a
> function does.
>
> Comments are *very* important in a weakly-typed language like PHP
> where you cannot tell anything at all from looking at the function.

I second this. Given local context it is difficult to figure out the  
proper pre- and post-conditions. And in this case JavaDoc style  
comments can be very helpful.

Internal documentation (and code-cleaning) shouldn't be a top  
priority, but if there are people who are ready and willing to work  
on it, I'd say let them go for it.

-ryan

>
>> I think if we surveyed our users, very few (if any) would bring up
>> the "coding standard" as an issue they care about. We need to focus
>> more on things like the excellent issues Mark J. raised in his
>> response.
>>
>
> Sure, that's classical features --- but having a well-commented code
> is also a feature, and for attracting developers and plugin authors I
> believe that clean code is a very attractive feature.
>
> -- 
> Martin Geisler                                     GnuPG Key:  
> 0x7E45DD38
>
> PHP EXIF Library      |  PHP Weather             |  PHP Shell
> http://pel.sf.net/    |  http://phpweather.net/  |  http:// 
> mgeisler.net/
> Read/write EXIF data  |  Show current weather    |  A shell in a  
> browser
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>