Hi Chris, Marcel, Tim, John, all:

Thanks very much for all your thoughts. There seem to be a few distinct "types" of comments:
- "first comments" (the terse and polished) in each method are treated differently, e.g. the "browse documentation" class menu item extracts them from all methods into a summary document
- "one liner" comments sprinkled around the code to help reading the code (Chris's examples, not to be overused)
- "documentation" comments with detailed imlementation or other info (desirable but swamping the method and forcing one to scroll...)
- plus surely some not so distinct

I have a suggestion:

I'd try to make my first comment as terse and polished as my language skills allow and I'd put my additional implementation notes and examples behind the code with the heading: 'Documentation'. It should hint you don't necessarily need to bother read it but it'd be there for a potential reader or for possible future placing it to an external documentation platform like Squeak Help. Does it make sense? Is it feasible such external Squeak Help notes "repository" accessible via e.g. method “browse documentation” menu item would ever be setup or is it just a fantasy? (I have no idea how difficult this could be)

When I learned Squeak I badly missed some more detailed info about methods and classes (e.g. class "entry points" like how to open any tool that is not in Squeak's menu somewhere). General Smalltalk literature is no replacement for such info. And especially when debugging, more detailed implementation info could be priceless :) (at least for a beginner)

Thanks again,
Jaromir


--

Jaromír Matas

mail at jaromir.net

From: Jaromir Matas<mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2022 20:07
To: ma.chris.m at gmail.com<mailto:ma.chris.m at gmail.com>; The general-purpose Squeak developers list<mailto:squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Note sharing inside Squeak?

Hi Chris,

> I like to consider the bridge between the code and the user.  By this, and recognizing that methods can have multiple comments, the first method comment could be classified as "special" from the sense that UI's might consume and show it to end users, and would be written under that assumption.

Yes, I've just noticed there's a 'browse documentation' item on the class menu (right-click) in the Browser that extracts all first comments from every method in that class into a document. So I agree the first comment should summarize the function of the method in a terse and polished way. It's the WHAT the method does; the HOW can/should come after that imo. Such a menu item available for each method could be the interface (the question is interface to what and how would the notes be entered - via Inbox? Approved by somebody or uncensored?)

> I do think it's essential for comments to be as terse and polished as they can.  I don't know if it was part of the original spirit of Smalltalk in the 1980's but, at least in the 1990's, my mentors, including Ward Cunningham, taught that long comments are generally detrimental.  Specifically, they can be very helpful.  But long comments on every method causes constant scrolling to be required, increasing the physical and mental effort needed to do development.  They argued that if so much prose is needed just to describe the method, the code should be improved instead.

That's good :) I've managed to write a 7 line long method with 22 lines of comments and honestly, I read them each time I want to remember how it works :) (Needless to say I have no idea how to improve it.) But I suspect this probably falls into the 'documentation' category... That's why my original question; I'd like to record somewhere all the notes that explain each dangerous step, examples, references to tests, external references to discussion etc. - without swamping the method.

> Documentation is something that can and should be separate, I don't think people should have to come all the way into to the code to find documentation, so I love Tim's idea to support links out to Squeak's Help system from within the methods.  A seamless bridge out to the documentation, so method comments can be talking about mechanics of the method.  Beautiful idea.

Yes, if there was an easy path from each method to to a documentation place, all the implementation details could go there and the method could only contain comments important for general understanding of its function. By details I mean e.g. why this nil check is important, what situations are not covered, how the method improves the previous version, interrelations with other methods etc.

> I just remembered one more technique a guy I worked with a long time ago would do that I wanted to share.  For long, complex methods, he would intersperse little one-liner comments that would "translate" the next line of code to a way that, when read collectively, would basically describe what the method does in prose.  He would write conditionals as a question, and then "answer the question".
> [...]
> I'm dubious, though, that this would be a good practice in Smalltalk code except in rare circumstances.

Yes, sometimes it's key; e.g. to point out that at this exact place in the code we assume/know this and this. In Smalltalk, I agree, it may be distracting if overused.

Thanks for your comments!
best,
Jaromir


--

Jaromír Matas

mail at jaromir.net

From: Chris Muller<mailto:asqueaker at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2022 23:02
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<mailto:squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Note sharing inside Squeak?

Hi Jaromir,

I like to consider the bridge between the code and the user.  By this, and recognizing that methods can have multiple comments, the first method comment could be classified as "special" from the sense that UI's might consume and show it to end users, and would be written under that assumption.  Then, the 2nd comment and beyond comments would be the ones talking to readers of the code (developers).  Also, that first comment (the UI comment) could even, for example, identify the argument types and return type in some standard syntax, that might even be processable -- although that might be handled better with a pragma.

I do think it's essential for comments to be as terse and polished as they can.  I don't know if it was part of the original spirit of Smalltalk in the 1980's but, at least in the 1990's, my mentors, including Ward Cunningham, taught that long comments are generally detrimental.  Specifically, they can be very helpful.  But long comments on every method causes constant scrolling to be required, increasing the physical and mental effort needed to do development.  They argued that if so much prose is needed just to describe the method, the code should be improved instead.

Documentation is something that can and should be separate, I don't think people should have to come all the way into to the code to find documentation, so I love Tim's idea to support links out to Squeak's Help system from within the methods.  A seamless bridge out to the documentation, so method comments can be talking about mechanics of the method.  Beautiful idea.

Best,
  Chris

On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 2:56 PM Jaromir Matas <mail at jaromir.net<mailto:mail at jaromir.net>> wrote:
Hi all,
In your experience, what would be a good place to *share* more detailed information about e.g. a method: like why I had to include this line and that check, which situations must be taken into account, alternative approaches, examples, references to tests etc etc. Ideally reachable from the image. Would such "notesharing" be welcome or rather confusing or even conterproductive? Often I forget why I did this and that and have to check my notes (if I'm lucky to have made them AND find them). I'm aware method comments are definitely not the place; they are meant to be rather terse and polished. Squeak wiki? Squeak Help? They’d have to be linked somehow to the methods, I imagine, to be useful in this regard…
Any suggestion welcome :)
Best,
Jaromir


--

Jaromír Matas

mail at jaromir.net<mailto:mail at jaromir.net>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20220602/0974066b/attachment.html>