|
Chris Maunder wrote: Update: And squashed. That was a sneaky one.
Don't think so - getting the Hamsters a lot this morning. Mostly seems to be Web02, but that's working sometimes as well...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Of course it works perfectly on testing and staging - just not production. Since we moved over to Docker containers, we have managed to largely eliminate this type of issue.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
For what it's worth, the servers working currently seem to respond extremely quickly.
Web02 seems to forgot who he is/was/needs to be...
|
|
|
|
|
Web2 is possessed. It's a VM that's an exact copy of the others.
Yet it's possessed. Always has been over the life of the site, even after dozens of hardware changes.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Sean has neglected The Server as Greta did with The Boy[^]
modified 15-Sep-16 9:50am.
|
|
|
|
|
I hope I never have to have a day at work like Greta ended up having. Jeez louise.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
|
... do you put XML comments on private members?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
No. What _happens_ in the class _stays_ in the class.
|
|
|
|
|
What, tattoo them?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Some people would not agree to the XML comments I would tattoo on their private members, but that's probably mutual.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Propose a survey
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe, just this once, the "Bacon" option could be replaced with "Pork".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. I comment every method, property and field regardless of its access level. However, private members don't make it to customer facing generated documentation.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Ravi Bhavnani wrote: private members don't make it to customer facing generated documentation So you're left with the dilemma: "Should I let my workmates see what I've done, and hope that they'll do as much for me?"
Tough decision.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
At the shop I work at, missing/incomplete comments are caught in code reviews.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
I love and hate code reviews.
Love because they can bring real improvements, and hate because they mean working on things that are a couple of weeks old, so you've forgotten about them.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
We used to have a policy of "no, not needed" but that resulted in a bunch of methods and parameters which were totally, perfectly obvious to the author, and a complete mystery to everyone else.
So comments. Always.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. Pretending we are our own customers and need not know how our own classes work internally is just lazyness.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: So comments. Always.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely yes.
Though sometimes they start as Ludo and end up as Llandudno...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: ... do you put XML comments on private members? Only the most outstanding members.
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Of course. Who is going to read the reference document that is going to be generated from the comments? Right: Future me and those who must do the job after me. Why should I hold back any information that might be useful for understanding what those mysterious private members were intended to do?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but only if it adds to the why and how it's used.
If it is just a backing field to some other property, them almost always no.
If it is some super important field necessary to making the simulated annealing work just right, then mostly definitely yes.
|
|
|
|
|
Why XML comments? Are plain comments too easy to use and read?
IMHO documentation must be divided in two parts: usage, which explains what a class do and which public members do what and internals, where private members have their rationales explained.
The first kind shouldn't be automatically generated nor bulkily included into the code while the second kind makes very little sense in a document so it should really stay near the code and easily readable when codingz, so the less meta-information the better.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
When I was six, there were no ones and zeroes - only zeroes. And not all of them worked. -- Ravi Bhavnani
|
|
|
|