pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Overly chatty XXX/TODO comments in PCP code

To: pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Overly chatty XXX/TODO comments in PCP code
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:27:15 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <y0m4merkakq.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
References: <1891109133.3771887.1451889063517.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <388872258.3778520.1451891633730.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0m4merkakq.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: AKzyDl5m/QxAs54L+IoQrpGx1Sptug==
Thread-topic: Overly chatty XXX/TODO comments in PCP code

----- Original Message -----
> [...]
> Would you seriously prefer the same code but no marker at all?  That
> is one possible outcome of your exorcise-XXX suggestion, if you keep
> going down this "try to embarrass" route.
> 

Whoah, nothing personal here.  These are general statements along the
lines "we seem to have a linear increase in TODO notes in some code,
its spreading, and it's not the way it's done in the core of this 20
year old codebase if we can help it".

> If those 26 XXX's in some 5200 lines are such an impediment, this
> may cure the symptoms:
> 
> % perl -p -i -e 's/XXX/Note:/g' *

They're not all at the start of the line, so its not so simple - some
are what would traditionally be considered XXX-worthy too.  But more
like 2 or 3, than 20 or 30.

It is of course hard to quantify.  There is a spectrum, I guess, and I
would put PCP code more on the core Linux-kernel side than say on the
systemtap side (for want of an XXX-rich code base I have at hand, not
to poke any fingers).

This is just something to keep an eye out for, please, like general
coding style.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>