Re: [PATCH 1/8] sha1-array: provide oid_array_filter

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:27:53AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> >> diff --git a/Documentation/CodingGuidelines b/Documentation/CodingGuidelines
> >> index 48aa4edfbd..b54684e807 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/CodingGuidelines
> >> +++ b/Documentation/CodingGuidelines
> >> @@ -358,7 +358,11 @@ For C programs:
> >>     string_list for sorted string lists, a hash map (mapping struct
> >>     objects) named "struct decorate", amongst other things.
> >>
> >> - - When you come up with an API, document it.
> >> + - When you come up with an API, document it.  It used to be
> >> +   encouraged to do so in Documentation/technical/, and the birds-eye
> >> +   level overview may still be more suitable there, but detailed
> >> +   function-by-function level of documentation is done by comments in
> >> +   corresponding .h files these days.
> >>
> >>   - The first #include in C files, except in platform specific compat/
> >>     implementations, must be either "git-compat-util.h", "cache.h" or
> >
> > Thanks. I had not looked at this closely and was under the false
> > impression that it was going in the other direction. Good to have it
> > clarified.
> 
> Heh, I knew people were in favor of one over the other but until
> Peff chimed in to this thread, I didn't recall which one was
> preferred, partly because I personally do not see a huge advantage
> in using in-code comments as docs for programmers, and do not like
> having to read them as in-code comments.
> 
> If somebody wants to wordsmith the text and send in a patch with
> good log message, please do so, as I myself am not sure if what I
> wrote is the consensus position.  It could be that they want to have
> even birds-eye overview in the header files.

Yes, I would say that everything should go into the header files. For
the same reason that the function descriptions should go there: by being
close to the thing being changed, it is more likely that authors will
remember to adjust the documentation. It's not exactly literate
programming, but it's a step in that direction.

That's just my opinion, of course. I've been very happy so far with the
documentation that we have transitioned. We talked a while ago about a
script to extract the comments into a "just documentation" and build it
as asciidoc, but I doubt I would use such a thing myself.

I do agree in general that mentioning this in CodingGuidelines is a good
idea.

-Peff