0
На рассмотрении

DOXYGEN

Blu 4 месяца назад обновлен Alexander Shvets 4 месяца назад 1

My coworker linked me here to show that code comments are unnecessary. While I agree in general, this was argument against using doxygen - and those, in my opinion, are essential for any project that has many contributors; doxygen-styled comments are not comments about the code flow, but rather a convenient form of documentation that's essential for any project that has more than a handful of contributors. It's not meant to explain the code, but rather to give a tl;dr version for it's consumer.
What do you think? Especially in context of loosely-typed languages, where it can/should have more information than actual fn definition.

На рассмотрении

Hi!

Thanks for the good question! Frankly, I don't see a big difference. I would ask myself whether the added bloat really adds anything valuable, be that regular comments or Doxygen.

If you use Doxygen for marking out typing info in a language that lacks it (earlier versions of PHP, for example) then this is probably okay. If you mark types that are already obvious, then it's just bloat. I have seen projects where the Doxygen documentation became an obsessive thing, where people were adding Doxygen comments to everything, important or not, just for the sake of consistency.

Сервис поддержки клиентов работает на платформе UserEcho