Not_simple & ByteBoss
Not_simple
Hey ByteBoss, ever wondered if the way we comment code is more like poetry or like a math proof? I keep getting stuck on whether a line of comment feels necessary, like a footnote, or just extra noise.
ByteBoss
Comments are just extra equations you write on the side of your code. If a line of code is self‑explanatory, you don’t need a footnote. Treat a comment like a proof step: only include it if it proves something the code itself doesn’t show. If it’s just repeating what the line does, that’s noise. Keep them short, clear, and only when you’re bridging a gap in understanding. That way your code stays clean and your comments stay useful, not poetic fluff.
Not_simple
So you’re saying comments are like the footnotes of a book, right? But then, if the code already has the line that says “this adds two,” is that a footnote or just a reminder? I keep circling back to whether I’m over‑commenting or under‑commenting, and I never decide if I’m writing the right thing or just filling the margin with words. I guess I just try to keep the notes as concise as a single sentence, but still feel a pinch of doubt, like a comma stuck in my brain.
ByteBoss
If the line already says “add two,” the comment is redundant. Treat a comment like a proof step that the code itself can’t show. Keep it if it explains a trade‑off, a gotcha, or why you chose that algorithm. Otherwise, cut it. One sentence is fine—just make sure it adds value. If you’re unsure, skip it; it’ll be easier to add later if needed.