On January 16, 2006 00:51, tim Rowledge wrote:
<<snip>>
>
> What we can have, should have and pretty much don't have is decent
> friggin' comments as to what classes are intended for, how they are
> implemented and their limitations, along with comments in the code to
> give some decent level of meaning. Comments in the system can be (but
> usually aren't) kept up to date. Better yet we could develop tools to
> replace the current browsers that make writing code more like writing
> documentation that has the implementation included as it goes

+10^9

>, what
> my friend Dan Lanovaz refers to as a software book.  But then we'd
> get complaints from the sort of plonkers that claim 'oh, my code is
> so clearly written that it needs no comments'. Gits.
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Strange OpCodes: JUM: Jeer at User's Mistake