I recently hired into a data analytics team for a hospital, and we don’t have a style guide. Lots of frustration from folks working with legacy code…I thought putting together a style guide would help folks working with code they didn’t write, starting with requiring a header for SQL scripts first as low hanging fruit.

Or so I thought.

My counterpart over application development says that we shouldnt be documenting any metadata in-line, and he’d rather implement “docfx” if we want to improve code metadata and documentation. I’m terrified of half-implementing yet another application to further muddy the waters–i’m concerned it will become just one-more place to look while troubleshooting something.

Am I going crazy? I thought code headers were an industry standard, and in-line comments are regarded as practically necessary when working with a larger team…

  • wethegreenpeople
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    Its wild to me that some people hear “your code should be self documenting” and take that to mean “never write comments”.

    All self documenting should mean is I can look at a method and get a general understanding of what it does, and it shouldn’t have any unknown functionality. Specific implementations, design quirks, choices that might only make sense if you know business context should all be comments in your code.

    On the other side of all that I worked with someone who insisted methods were documented college style, the “authors” name, date it was written, what it does, why it’s here, our star sign. I hate that just as much, so much clutter.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Its wild to me that some people hear “your code should be self documenting” and take that to mean “never write comments”.

      It’s the same people that hear “security by obscurity is not security” and take it to mean “publicity is more secure than obscurity”. A key being under a door mat is bad but putting it on top of the mat because “obscurity isn’t security” is silly.

      Edit: A better example is having a hidden door with a look is still more secure than having a non-hidden door with a lock.

    • joshcodesstuff@mastodon.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      @wethegreenpeople @alokir It is definitely a balance. Programmers love to preach DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself), and then always seem to go and write a comment explaining what their last line of code does. Understanding comes from ‘why’ and ‘how’, not one or other. Context is very important. That being said, so long as collapsible comments are a thing in most text editors, Im fine with someone being verbose. Programming can be as stylistic as it can be technical.