On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:17 PM, R Kent James <k...@caspia.com> wrote:
> But for the record, there are LOTS of issues in Mozilla code that are > missing a "part of writing production code" My own pet peeve is JS code > that gives no hint about the types of inputs, when there are complex > assumptions about the types. Or C++ files that give you no hint about why > they exist, and their fundamental purpose. How would you like it if I > pushed a patch that shutdown all Firefox code development until all of > these documentation issues were cleaned up? That might not be the highest > priority today, right, even though it is a "fundamental part of writing > production code" (as well as my pet peeve and a high priority to me)? > Fair enough. If someone simply broke all of Mozilla Central and said, "Well, it's good engineering to do it this way", that wouldn't fly: within Mozilla Central, the burden is on the annotator to keep the code working. And indeed, the way the change was done, marking up interfaces is a follow-up process that can proceed incrementally. Markup is rate-limited by the rule that patches mustn't break the build. So I guess what you're you're saying is that, out-of-tree, it's the reverse: the burden rests on people who have no interest in the interface being annotated, and who possibly aren't even familiar with the affected code in their application. There's no rate limit on the impact on out-of-tree code. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
