Re: The Harvesting process and the BFAV

On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 11:13:31AM +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> As always, I agree in principle but I will *always* repeat this:
> 	Class comments and "top" method comments should be written when the
> code is written.
> 
> That does not imply "perfectly-documented" - it rather implies
> "documented *at all*". And I strongly urge people to think about this -
> why is the image so poorly commented? Because SqC took exactly this
> approach - "better to getthe stuff in, who cares, we can write comments
> later". Surprise! There is no "later" when it comes to code comment.
> 
> Now, after his little rant - I agree with you Marcus. I just want the
> little, little, little rule added: 	"Just make sure the damn code has
> proper code comments!"
>
Ok. Then we add a button to the CodeBrowser that generates a SUnit test that
tests for the comment, generates a changeset, sends it to the list
with [Tests] suffix. So the reviewer can approve the fix, and at
the same time force the community to revisit that paritcular
method. Same for Class comments. 

   Marcus

-- 
Marcus Denker [email protected]  -- Squeak! http://squeak.de