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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.182.115.229 with SMTP id jr5mr20267084obb.38.1409670077461; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:01:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.57.113 with SMTP id h17mr564859igq.0.1409670077235; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:01:17 -0700 (PDT) Path: buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!uq10no8473097igb.0!news-out.google.com!aw9ni0igc.0!nntp.google.com!uq10no8473086igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:01:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=KSa2aQoAAACOxnC0usBJYX8NE3x3a1Xq NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <7376f57a-aa89-4ca4-8b44-568dee994707@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Is there a way to do large block of source code comments From: Adam Beneschan Injection-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:01:17 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:188803 Date: 2014-09-02T08:01:16-07:00 List-Id: On Monday, September 1, 2014 12:08:21 PM UTC-7, Niklas Holsti wrote: > One of the worst mistakes in the programming field is the choice of the > name "comments" for the in-source documentation and description. > "Comments" suggests something secondary, incidental, unstructured, > incomplete.=20 Which is probably an accurate description of how programmers used them when= the term "comment" was first used. I wouldn't call this a mistake, any more than I'd call it a mistake to refe= r to a memory dump as a "core dump" or to the program that translates from = a high-level language as a "compiler". [I'm not sure how much the term "co= re" is used now, but it was certainly used well past the time when ferrite = cores all but disappeared.] None of these terms makes literal sense now, b= ut they made sense when they were introduced, historically, and the terms h= ave stuck around even though their meanings have evolved. We do need to re= member that our terminology, like our programming language syntax and our t= echnology, did not spring forth fully formed from somebody's head. -- Adam