|
|
|
|
|
by masklinn
3444 days ago
|
|
> Presumably "summary" appears quite a lot because C# developers use markup like `<summary>` in their comments, so automated systems can build documentation Yes, and the IDE will auto-generate a doc comment with a <summary> because that's pretty much the most basic doc comment you can get. > In that sense, it's not really a comment anymore: it's one machine-readable language embedded inside another. My issue is not that it's a comment, it's that it is essentially worthless as your IDE's basic "add method" intention (or whatever) is going to add it automatically. > That's certainly interesting, to me at least. It tells me about the signal/noise ratio of the language, the prevalence of various forms of documentation (e.g. <summary> is conventional, whilst something like <precondition> is not), etc. <summary> is not conventional, it's the primary tag used by the C# documentation system and shown by IntelliSense. <precondition> is not that. |
|
Just because an IDE will write boilerplate automatically, that doesn't mean the boilerplate wasn't written, checked into version control, presented to developers, etc. Even if such boilerplate were added by an IDE, and hidden from developers (e.g. using code folding), it's still there in the language.
In this case, the language is C#, not e.g. some "C#-like" language which gets preprocessed/transpiled by an IDE into C# by scattering boilerplate around.
Whilst tooling can help us live with a language's deficiencies, they don't remove those deficiencies ;)