From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: f8c65,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gidf8c65,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,af40e09e753872c X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,f292779560fb8442 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1008e3,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public From: z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Ralph Silverman) Subject: Re: Hungarian notation Date: 1996/06/07 Message-ID: <4p9e3e$a5c@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 158994839 references: <4o4jeg$7e6@tpd.dsccc.com> <4p49vq$etm@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us> <1996Jun6.143739.18846@merlin.hgc.edu> followup-to: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2,comp.edu,comp.lang.eiffel organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2,comp.edu,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1996-06-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: James McKim (jcm@hgc.edu) wrote: : In article <4p49vq$etm@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us> z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Ralph Silverman) writes: : [...] : > : > the idea, : > that : > comments should : > outlive and outlast : > original code : > when that code has been modified... : > is extremely horrifying and bizarre! : Um, well, not to me, or at least not in all cases. If the comments : represent the _specification_ of a routine as opposed to the implementation, : it is quite common for the code to evolve substantially with no change : to the comments. : I'm reading this in comp.lang.eiffel. To a limited extent, Eiffel supports : the compilation of rigorous comments that specify a feature. In the ideal : this means that if the code and the comments do not remain synchronized : you usually discover the problem very quickly. : > : > however, : > this does raise an intersting question... : > version control for comments! : > : >*********end r.s. response*************** : >Ralph Silverman : >z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us : > : Hope this helps, : -- Jim : -- : *------------------------------------------------------------------------------* : Jim McKim (860)-548-2458 Co-editor of Eiffel Outlook : Internet: jcm@hgc.edu Subscribe early and often! -- ************begin r.s. response************** surely there is a morass effect here... whereby comments require comments as code is modified and whereby comments are 'kind of' applicable... since such are not vetted automatically by a compiler or assembler no systematic minimal order or organization is imposed! (there is an old working class advisory... 'look busy' how much more could such putative standards achieve than that?) ************end r.s. response**************** Ralph Silverman z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us