Timeline for Coding standard for clarity: comment every line of code?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2016 at 20:12 | comment | added | Andrew T Finnell | @wildcard Thanks! I really liked his answer and didn't want it to be lost in the weeds of a single statement. | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 19:51 | comment | added | Wildcard | I upvoted the modified answer. Very nice. | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 18:19 | history | edited | Andrew T Finnell | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Removed controversial blanket statement and expanded upon the principal of that statement
|
| Nov 23, 2016 at 18:10 | comment | added | Andrew T Finnell |
@whatsisname I'm very happy there's someone else that understands. Your responses are written more elegantly and precise than I could have ever strived for. The statement with systems that exist to justify and require themselves rather than being a means to an end to ensure quality products is EXACTLY what i was attempting to illustrate. Thank you for finding my words for me. I truly mean it. We have to separate the idea of inducing quality from the idea of following a process as they aren't the same. This is why we have QA, Stackoverflow, and very forgiving customers.
|
|
| Nov 23, 2016 at 17:54 | comment | added | whatsisname | Educating and training your team isn't an option from the aspect of the quality system, as you have no guarantee the team actually learns or applies anything, and no objective measure for which to have a checkbox to check that they are applying what they supposedly learned. | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 17:52 | comment | added | whatsisname | It's a strange world, and keep in mind the rules are written by bureaucrats with little knowledge of the software domain, and you often end up with systems that exist to justify and require themselves rather than being a means to an end to ensure quality products. | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 17:51 | comment | added | whatsisname | @Wildcard: The problem is that when you enter into regulated industries, the process reigns supreme over everything, having a process is more important than whether the process is worthwhile or not. Everything has to boil down to checkboxes on some form, every checkbox has to be specific and verifiable, and the more lee-way you have in a checkbox the more risk you run of getting hassled in an audit. | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 15:52 | comment | added | Andrew T Finnell | @Wildcard Perhaps you could explain how a Standard can allow for judgement? Wouldn't that be a Guide at that point? A Standard is "an idea or thing used as a measure, norm, or model in comparative evaluations." How can one use something inherently subjective, so subjective it depends on who's reading it, as a measurement of quality? | |
| Nov 23, 2016 at 2:35 | comment | added | Wildcard | +1 for "You are trying to mechanize good judgment," -1 for "Your only option is to just hope for the best," and that leaves me not voting. Educating and training your team is an option, also. Standards can allow for judgment. | |
| Nov 20, 2016 at 18:40 | history | answered | whatsisname | CC BY-SA 3.0 |