Michael Gerdau wrote:Obvious comments explaining _what_ the code is doing are annoying. They're fluff. You can see what the code is doing. The critical comments are the ones that explain _why_ and _how_. The comments should give the higher level view as to the rationale for that code. Of course if you've got some highly-optimized bit of black magic there had better be some good comments explaining what's going on...but there should also be some comments explaining why we need the magic in the first place. Chris -
| Chuck Ebbert | Wanted: simple, safe x86 stack overflow detection |
| Alan Cox | Re: ndiswrapper and GPL-only symbols redux |
| Yinghai Lu | [PATCH 03/42] x86: remove irq_vectors_limits |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
git: | |
| しらいしななこ | Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.5.4 |
| Jan Wielemaker | git filter-branch --subdirectory-filter, still a mistery |
| Pierre Habouzit | [PATCH] guilt(1): Obvious bashisms fixed. |
| Christopher Faylor | Re: First cut at git port to Cygwin |
| Thilo Pfennig | OpenBSD project goals |
| Marco Peereboom | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| Daniel Hazelton | Re: Wasting our Freedom |
| Luke Bakken | Re: No Blob without Puffy |
| Julius Volz | [PATCHv3 19/24] IVPS: Disable sync daemon for IPv6 connections |
| Paul Moore | [RFC PATCH v4 04/14] selinux: Fix missing calls to netlbl_skbuff_err() |
| Dave Jones | odd RTL8139 quirk. |
| Patrick McHardy | [NET_SCHED 04/15]: act_api: use nlmsg_parse |
