On 2012/11/11 15:26:48, mike7 wrote:
To be clear, I have no problem implementing a LilyPond documentation
and
commenting policy to move towards the establishment of an API. This
sounds like
a worthwhile yet difficult task. I would start talking about this
separately
from any one patch.
Mike, you document _nothing_, _ever_. And whenever one asks you to put even the slightest amount of documentation to any patch of yours, you reply "this would be a separate issue". You are pretty much the only person who _deletes_ more comment lines than he ever writes. I don't care about what "policy" we want to have for comments, but you _need_ to document the _purpose_ and the _working_ of your code, or nobody will ever be able to figure out how it works. You have no problem tripling the complexity of code without writing a single comment, and your excuse always is "it was badly documented before, so lets document it even worse". And no, answering a question in review is not the same as documenting code. http://codereview.appspot.com/6827072/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
