There should be no need to treat the method any differently than any other. In this example, a method named
CompareTo() would be obvious to anyone with significant .NET experience as being the implementation of
IComparable<T>. The idiot who comments it out or deletes it will be told by the compiler that the class no longer implements
IComparable<T>.CompareTo(), and at that point should understand they messed up and put it back. The total bozo who, on receiving this error, thinks the best solution is to remove the
IComparable<T> interface from the class definition (without one hell of a good reason, like he's traced every usage of the class across your codebase and is 100% positive the class is never part of any sort operation) probably doesn't need to be working for your company.
If you wanted to be nice,
//Implementation of IComparable<T> placed somewhere near the function declaration (just above it, or just inside the function body) should make it clear enough even to the boneheads mentioned above.
If you wanted to be really nice, you can xml-doc the class/method, and in the
<remarks> tag, affirm that this method is the implementation of
IComparable<T> for the class. This will not only show up in source, but also in any SandCastle documentation you create. It might show up in IntelliSense, but I doubt it; remarks can be pretty big. If it absolutely positively has to be known via IntelliSense that the method is the implementation of the interafce, mention it in the