Talk:Comment (computer programming)
article move
This article was moved to comment (computing) and then moved back to comment (computer programming). The article then underwent some changes including:
- addition of citations and references
- addition of new sections and content
- restructuring and refactoring of some of the preexisting content
Some items still outstanding:
- Article seems to assume "developers" are only ones who read source code (may need to rethink in light of open source)
- The existing comment (computing) article now needs considerable attention as it is now just a "stub"
- The separate Comment out article may need to be merged into this one. dr.ef.tymac 05:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
re-add 2x reverted intro
Can someone please explain what is incorrect about the intro section as of my last edit? It was done to improve the article clarity and accuracy, but reverted twice without any discussion, and without fixing the existing deficiencies that I and another editor addressed previously. It is good to see this article move forward with discussion and consensus, let's keep up the good work, Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 11:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
A quick "comment" about the recently reverted contents
Hi guys,
I have quite a lot to catch up on the discussion we began on this (BTW, did it end? I see that editing is in progress) but really the point that comments are not part of the source code is ridiculous (the assertion that comments "are ignored" is close to meaningless too if one has a minimal idea of how a parser works, but that's what one usually gets when trying to explain things in a (over-)"simplified" way). Don't be offended, but could I ask those who are not programmers to refrain from adding to this article? —Gennaro Prota•Talk 11:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Gennaro Prota: 1) can you indicate where you mean (in the article) that indicates "comments are not part of the source code"? I can fix the relevant section, but I'm not sure which specific part you mean; 2) The phrasing "comments are ignored" is used quite commonly in programmer reference books (at least in English, see e.g.,[1]) are you saying this phrasing is always bad, or just misused in the article? If it is the latter can you point out where so we can fix it?; 3) I am not sure how a person's "job title" applies to contributions on Wikipedia, especially since all editors regardless of background must satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability. Is there a specific element of the article you were addressing with the "non-programmer" remark?
- ^ Geroimenko, Vladimir (2004). Dictionary of Xml Technologies and the Semantic Web By Vladimir Geroimenko. Computer Bks / Languages/ Programming. ISBN 1852337680.