On Tuesday 30 of November 2010, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Additionally, I think most classes don't necessarily need detailed
docs for all methods in the first place (which may also hurt later
merging from OOo), but would already benefit from a two-line
"mission statement" at class level (of course plus some module-level
overview of "what's inside").
I beg to differ. After having years of experience using a nice, intuitive and
well-documented APIs (Qt,KDE), and being used to that, I sometimes rather
suffer getting familiar with this codebase. Most APIs are not documented at
all (or at most poorly, or in German, which is about the same in practice for
many people). This is futher made worse by some APIs not being very intuitive
(cryptic abbreviations, unclear naming, obsolete idiosyncracies, duplication,
basic things being needlessly complicated).
This could be a significant factor for new possible contributors. While
patches removing dead code or similar certainly help too, the codebase can
move forward only by people writing new code, and that requires understanding
of the existing code.
So I find any suggesting that docs are not necessary (or valueing merging
higher) to be eventually shooting ourselves in the foot.
--
Lubos Lunak
l.lunak@suse.cz
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.