When you are reading a math textbook and it says the proof for this theorem is trivial.
this is left as an exercise for the reader
My code is self-explanatory
it("does something", () => { /* tbd */ });I love that this is a photo of a print that has been places. Analog meme.
Yes, I don't see the problem? I don't think I am doing anything wrong?
The comments are supposed to describe the mode of operation. For example "the volume up push button is an active low push button tied to the pin 10 interrupt handler. While the button is pressed and held down, the volume (internal variable) is increased in 2.5 dB increments until approaching the limit of 90 dB.
God I wish consumer electronics had user manuals written like that
"Volume Up makes volume number go up"
Yes I had a coworker that commented like that:
i++; // increase i by one
Tells you nothing new - a wasted comment. Everyone who can program know this. A comment that describes what you do.
i++; // increase i to move to the next entry
A better comment, explaining why you do what you do. Always add information in your comments that the code doesn't supply already. If you name your variables and methods well, good code is often self-explanatory. Use comments when it's not.
Of course in this trivial example no comment would be needed.
Oh and use XML comments, when applicable.
