3 ms·

I think his argument is: "Comments is not a substitute for short functions and javadoc". That sounds extremely valid, imho.

• seabee 11y ago
  If that was his argument I'd be happier with it. As described, his goal was to encode comments in the function name and describe caveats in test cases; none of those steps sound like 'write a javadoc'. Javadoc and comments are both forms of code documentation. Perhaps we can generalise OP's point to the following: "Most of the things programmers say about documentation of code are excuses for not writing any documentation at all" I'm not going to use a library without documentation in favour of one that is documented. Above a certain minimum standard, it doesn't matter how 'clean' the code is if you don't understand why it exists. Cute naming simply doesn't make up for a lack of documentation, and avoiding documentation should be considered a cone of shame, not a badge of honour.