[erlang-questions] Style wars: junk comments

Alexandre Aguiar asaguiar@REDACTED
Wed Sep 12 15:47:05 CEST 2012


As far as I am not an Erlang expert, some ideas discussed here are not peculiar to Erlang.

Bengt Kleberg <bengt.kleberg@REDACTED> escreveu:
>If you expect your code to be read/reviewed when printed, you should
>have the functions alphabetically ordered.
>Grouping exported/internal functions also help the reviewers.

Alphabetical order may or may not help. Modular code produces modules with small number of objects that can be efficiently visually navigated. The relationship between how efficiently and the number of objects, AFAIK, is undetermined.

Some convention to ease navigation accross different modules would be more sensible and worthwhile, IMVVVHO, of course.

>> On 12 September 2012 09:56, Richard O'Keefe <ok@REDACTED>
>> that repeats something immediately obvious

Obviousness is a function of familiarity. I often see this in software documentation that is obvious for the author. :-) 

Style is not about aesthetics. It is about discipline. And discipline is about standards. Navigating a module with a previously known internal organization is far more efficient. Several languages have (or had) structural rules for their codings. 

Some tags and comments work as markups that can ease learning and navigating by working as coding standards. Besides, disk space is not expensive today. :-)  Not to mention that such standard markups will be essential for future implementation of cross module indexing systems and other indexing mechanisms.

My 2 cents.



Sent from my tablet. Please, excuse my brevity.
Enviado do tablet. Por favor, perdoe a brevidade.
Publié de le tablet. S'il vous plaît pardonnez la brièveté.
Veröffentlicht aus dem Tablet. Bitte verzeihen Sie die Kürze.
Enviado desde mi tablet. Por favor, disculpen mi brevedad.
Inviato dal mio tablet. Per favore, scusate la mia brevità.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list