Documentation has this nasty problem of becoming outdated. It can be infuriating to have stale documentation. It's often worse than having no separate documentation at all.
Docs should be left for high level things that don't change often, like the overall architecture, or module descriptions. I disagree with documenting individual files or classes. If you do, then it must be directly beside the code it's documenting (in the source code) to at least have a chance of being up-to-date.
If you're using docs as a design tool, then fine, but throw them away after it's been implemented.
Doc blocks are mandatory, imho, but also a separate topic. The problem is that a lot of developers use the existence of docblocks and code comments as an excuse to not have to do non-code documentation.
I argue, in the post, that non-code documentation is also important, because it fills a different role than in-code documentation. Ideally you would have both!
I'm quite undecided. On most projects that had architecture docs, I was the person to write them. I never referred to them again, nor did anybody else.
I can see them being helpful should I disappear from a project, but I'm not convinced they are essential. They also take time, which is time not spent doing something else.
That's fair, I'd say it depends somewhat on the project. But also, fixing the knowledge silo is, long term, a thing worth doing for the project. That's an extra point I could add to the subject, thanks for that :)
Documentation has this nasty problem of becoming outdated. It can be infuriating to have stale documentation. It's often worse than having no separate documentation at all.
Agreed 100%. That's why I propose documentation be updated before you write that new feature or update. More often then not, developers forget to update the documentation after the update's been pushed.
Docs should be left for high level things that don't change often, like the overall architecture, or module descriptions.
Also agreed! I guess it wasn't clear in the post but I didn't say you have to document every nook and cranny in the code. What I was saying, in the excuse section, was that documenting within the code is not a valid excuse to not have proper standalone documentation. In an ideal world you would have both good high-level documentation and accurate docblocks.
Currently a senior technical writer for AWS IoT. Previously: professor of Technical Communication, Programmer/Writer, Software Developer, Air Force officer, & Electronics Technician.
How likely the docs are to be out of date or inaccurate is inversely proportional to how highly they are prioritized by the people who are changing things to be documented.
But, one size does not fit all.
The important takeaway from Nick's article is to make documentation a conscious design decision instead of a default (or ignored) one. Understand and decide for what you will need documentation and why, and then act on those decisions. Know to whom you need to communicate, what they need to know and why, and the best way to communicate that to them.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Documentation has this nasty problem of becoming outdated. It can be infuriating to have stale documentation. It's often worse than having no separate documentation at all.
Docs should be left for high level things that don't change often, like the overall architecture, or module descriptions. I disagree with documenting individual files or classes. If you do, then it must be directly beside the code it's documenting (in the source code) to at least have a chance of being up-to-date.
If you're using docs as a design tool, then fine, but throw them away after it's been implemented.
Couldn't agree more, the risk of refactored code linked to legacy comments is too high.
Always believed a summary doc block along with well named variables/method names should provide enough guidance for very little additional effort.
Although coming up with well named variables is another challenge in itself.
Doc blocks are mandatory, imho, but also a separate topic. The problem is that a lot of developers use the existence of docblocks and code comments as an excuse to not have to do non-code documentation.
I argue, in the post, that non-code documentation is also important, because it fills a different role than in-code documentation. Ideally you would have both!
I'm quite undecided. On most projects that had architecture docs, I was the person to write them. I never referred to them again, nor did anybody else.
I can see them being helpful should I disappear from a project, but I'm not convinced they are essential. They also take time, which is time not spent doing something else.
That's fair, I'd say it depends somewhat on the project. But also, fixing the knowledge silo is, long term, a thing worth doing for the project. That's an extra point I could add to the subject, thanks for that :)
Found the problem! Hehe ;)
Agreed 100%. That's why I propose documentation be updated before you write that new feature or update. More often then not, developers forget to update the documentation after the update's been pushed.
Also agreed! I guess it wasn't clear in the post but I didn't say you have to document every nook and cranny in the code. What I was saying, in the excuse section, was that documenting within the code is not a valid excuse to not have proper standalone documentation. In an ideal world you would have both good high-level documentation and accurate docblocks.
How likely the docs are to be out of date or inaccurate is inversely proportional to how highly they are prioritized by the people who are changing things to be documented.
But, one size does not fit all.
The important takeaway from Nick's article is to make documentation a conscious design decision instead of a default (or ignored) one. Understand and decide for what you will need documentation and why, and then act on those decisions. Know to whom you need to communicate, what they need to know and why, and the best way to communicate that to them.