5 ms·

Thank you! I agree with so much in this, it really strikes the right balance of clean code vs productivity. One of my peeves is a review that points out a bug/

Thank you! I agree with so much in this, it really strikes the right balance of clean code vs productivity. One of my peeves is a review that points out a bug/incorrectness without offering proof, or suggesting the fix/correct way. The reviewer might observe a code smell, but it's so much better dealt with a question-comment, e.g. "did you try?" vs "this looks wrong". I generally aim to make every comment a question ("can we..."), and not make assumptions that the author didn't think of something already. Unless I just stating an objective fact that is clearly unknown e.g. "this duplicates library function x...".

H8crilA 5y ago
Yeah the general style of putting comments into questions is much better. But that's not exactly what I meant with question-comments, I sometimes genuinely don't know why are they doing something like this, or have to ask for additional testing/evaluation/analysis/profiling results before I can decide that it's most likely not going to blow anything up. And as long as there's low probability of damage (or rather low expected value of damage) I am happy with the change :) What really helps is a style guide. It shuts most of those pointless style nitpicks, God I hate them.