I’m a children’s musician and college algebra instructor working on a late-in-life iOS Dev career change. First project: a different kind of calendar for my dementia-challenged elderly mom.
Location
Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA
Education
Master's in Mathematics
Pronouns
he/him
Work
Adjunct Instructor, College Algebra; Children's Musician
The article is about documentation, which encompasses both comments and variable naming. Also, I took each example to be illustrative of a particular point. In point 2, the example went from "bad" to "good" by providing context, while both versions happen to be redundant. In point 4 the example went from "bad" to "good" by removing redundancy. In both cases the code could be further improved by applying both principals. In point 2 the "good" example could be made even better by dropping the comment altogether to remove the redundancy. In point 4 the "good" example could provide even more context with a better variable name (in which case a comment may not be needed), or a more specific comment (occurrences of what?). But I believe the author's intent was to create examples that focus on one issue at a time.
The article is about documentation, which encompasses both comments and variable naming. Also, I took each example to be illustrative of a particular point. In point 2, the example went from "bad" to "good" by providing context, while both versions happen to be redundant. In point 4 the example went from "bad" to "good" by removing redundancy. In both cases the code could be further improved by applying both principals. In point 2 the "good" example could be made even better by dropping the comment altogether to remove the redundancy. In point 4 the "good" example could provide even more context with a better variable name (in which case a comment may not be needed), or a more specific comment (occurrences of what?). But I believe the author's intent was to create examples that focus on one issue at a time.
Got my point..