On Dec 31, 2008, at 1:29 PM, Luc Prefontaine wrote:
> In the mid 80's I and others in a Fortran dev. team created a super > javadoc. This beast was spitting out a FULL > document in the editor used by office people. > > You would write comments in the code that were extracted and you > would get a readable well formatted > document after running the tool. Without the comments, the document > looked ... empty and ugly. > Missing items were as obvious as a nose in a face. > > Easier for code reviewer to control that, no need to read the code, > read the document. If it does not make sense > then go back to the coder. > > Coders had to add decent comments since the conventions were not > only based on what you extract from the code > (like javadoc) but also what is expected in comments so the document > text content gets filled with decent content. > When you force the coder to enter comments to fil a chapter > introduction, well he/she has no choice. > > Of course it looks like if creating code is twice as complex but in > fact you saved time when you need a system to be > described very precisely. It also insured that comments were > meaningful and in synch. with the code. > That sounds a LOT like Knuth's Literate Programming. Was there influence from that or was this wholly based non your own? joe --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
