5 ms·
This doesn't seem all that awful. If the old code is significantly more readable, then perhaps it serves as good documentation about the new code. It is somewh
by craigds 11y ago
This doesn't seem all that awful. If the old code is significantly more readable, then perhaps it serves as good documentation about the new code.
It is somewhat surprising that this would last 30 years though. In our huge codebase, barely any lines have survived 8 years. Even less so the comments.
- choward 11y agoNo matter how I look at this, it is terrible. If this is okay, where do you draw the line? How do I know which commented out code is okay to commit and which isn't? I understand the point of doing it, but there are many other solutions that are all better.
- ajuc 11y ago> If this is okay, where do you draw the line? This argument can be used to ban anything. Where do you draw the line? Jokes aside, one possible line is "it should make sense after a while of considering alternative solutions".
- marcoperaza 11y ago>How do I know which commented out code is okay to commit and which isn't? By exercising judgment. Thank God that's still required, else we'd be out of a job ;)
- throwaway2048 11y agoThe actual lines themselves may not have changed much in your codebase, but unless you are diciplined about stuff like not introducing whitespace change noise, its very easy to rototill an entire codebase over a peroid of years.
- nitrogen 11y agoUsing git add -p helps immensely with this, since it highlights trailing whitespace in red and each change can be approved separately. It takes a few days at most to get used to using the -p flag, and it's worth it.