[Pharo-project] comments comments comments again
Mariano Martinez Peck
marianopeck at gmail.com
Sun Feb 27 19:49:25 CET 2011
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr
> why can we put comment in class comment?
> For example I worked on fixing 1.2 and now I want to execute the
> configurationOfPharo and no magic invocation....
> JUST A FUCKING EMPTY class comment as usual.
> So again I feel like an idiot and I'm trying in the dark. You have NOT A
> SINGLE REASON NOT TO PUT COMMENT!
> One of these days I will hack the system to break the load when a class as
> no comment.
I was the original author of such class. And yes, I don't write class
comments. I am not use too, usually because:
- I almost don't find it use
- The browser doesn't help me to see class comments
- Who can guess that under a '?' there are class comments? I discovered that
YEARS after I was already using Smalltalk
- I prefer writting/reading a TestCase for such class (I know it is not the
same as class comments, but it helps).
- I prefer looking at senders/references to such class
- When class comments are long, the browser is FUCKING slow to write
Even more, in this case, what would you write for example? ConfigurationOf*
are just Metacello Configurations. What would you need to know about that
despite of Metacello? If you know Metacello, you should know how to query
the configuration and get all the things you want, like groups, packages,
So now after randomly trying.....I get a nice DNU.
But do you think that could be fixed just because of having class comments?
> Apparently my time is not worth anything....
> So if you want to see if my fix works. Give a try I will not and if what I
> did break, may be I will have a look or may be not
> because no time for that after.
> And BTW do not put any comment, it feels much cooler that way.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-project