bobvan (06/16/82)
Dave Ihnat suggests that This is an attitude that has been taught and touted by respectable people. It's just that, after years of trying to unravel such code, I --and many others-- have come to realize that, as much as clear, concise code and well-chosen identifiers can help, something more is needed. Please don't feed this delusion. People need no encouragement to not write documentation. Isn't there a contradiction here? This attitude has been taught and touted by respectable people, and yet, it is a delusion? I suggest that this is an emotional issue that cannot be discussed to the point of a logical conclusion. The issue is whether or not programs can be self documenting. I claim that this has to be determined on a program by program basis. Those who take a strong stand on *either* side are making dangerous generalizations. Dave Ihnat has said ... don't listen to the nice man who suggests that raw, unadorned code with NO comments is sufficient to describe any program longer than 3 lines in ANY language. Mr. Davidson and those who believe that self documenting code can exist have NEVER suggested that programs should have NO comments. Let's not get carried away here! I believe that non-trivial programs *can* be written so that no external documentation is necessary for the maintenance of the program. I would go so far as to say that I have written a few. This feat is a lot more difficult in some languages than in others. Some programmers can achieve it with relative ease while others never will. In summary, can't we leave this issue programmers to decide for themselves after carefully taking into account the source language, the experience of the maintenance staff, the size of the program, and their own programming ability? Bob Van Valzah (...!decvax!ittvax!tpdcvax!bobvan)