* Re: New Ada Emacs mode !
[not found] ` <BEVAN.94Sep4132752@lemur.cs.man.ac.uk>
@ 1994-09-06 13:39 ` Ted Dennison
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Ted Dennison @ 1994-09-06 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <BEVAN.94Sep4132752@lemur.cs.man.ac.uk>, bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan) writes:
|> [ I tried email but it bounced - bevan ]
I'm sorry about this one. For some reason my email address is
being incorrectly posted. I should complain to my postmaster about
this, but I'm too lazy.
I should also routinely post my real address, but again, laziness
tends to get the better of me.
|>
|> In article <341rj4$bd0@theopolis.orl.mmc.com> dennison@romulus23.DAB.GE.COM (Ted Dennison) writes:
|> o - Are you working on a more elaborate header? I usualy need way more
|> documentation that just Author, Title, and Creation Date.
|>
|> Just curious: why store this information in the file rather than being
|> mainly implicit in a revision control system?
Heh Heh Heh! Good question. I'll make sure to forward it to my CM and QA
people, not that it will do any good.
Let's just say that on (most) every project I work on, there are code
header standards. I have never seen them require that little information.
Typical requirements are for a more detailed description, description of
all parameters, list of all possible exceptions that might be raised, and
explanation of any side efects a routine might have. File headers typicaly
require a running list of changes to the file be kept, with authors, dates,
and reason for change (even though this info is avaiable through sccs or
any other decent revision control system).
T.E.D.
dennison@romulus.orl.mmc.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread