On 2010-02-25, Michael Rudolf <spamfres...@ch3ka.de> wrote:
> Am 25.02.2010 16:07, schrieb Grant Edwards:
>> On 2010-02-25, Paul Rudin<paul.nos...@rudin.co.uk> wrote:
>>> No idea, but it would be nice to have some multiline comment syntax
>>> (other than # at the beginning of each line). Particularly one that can
>>> be nested.
>>
>> if 0:
>>
>> Seriously, that's what I generally do: mark the block of code,
>> indent it 1 level, add an if 0: at the top.
>
> I really hate it when I see something like this in other's
> code.
The only time you'll see that in my code is if you're watching
over my shoulder as I troublshoot something.
> The fact that my IDE (vim) still displays this like valid code
> ready to be executed can cause extreme frustration while
> trying to spot a bug.
Nobody in their right mind _leaves_ "commented out" code like
that (or other commenting mechanisms) in a program after
they're done with whatever little experiment they were
performing.
I know people who will re-write a block of code and leave the
old code there, but comment it out, along with the date and
their name, and other such nonsense. I hate that. Keeping
track of what _used_ to be there and who changed what when is
the job of the version control system. Trying to keep the
edit-history of a file in-line as comments just makes the code
hard to read and maintain.
> This is almost as bad as "commenting out" (parts of) a for
> loop by adding a continue.
IMO, any sort of "commented out" code left in a program is a
big mistake. If the code is soething that does need to stay
for optional use, then it needs to be properly integrated along
with logic to control when it's used.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Four thousand
at different MAGNATES, MOGULS
visi.com & NABOBS are romping in my
gothic solarium!!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
