News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Getting Good Results from Claude Code by weego on Friday August 08, 2025 @11:54AM (#44838482)
written once, looked at 100 times.

I try to prompt-enforce no line by line documentation, but encourage function/class/module level documentation that will help future developers/AI coding agents. Humans are generally better, but AI sometimes needs a help to stop it not understanding a piece of code's context and just writing it's own new function that does the same thing

Re:Getting Good Results from Claude Code by skydhash on Saturday August 09, 2025 @09:31AM (#44846319)
But comments like that are most likely to be WHAT the code do. Which is rarely useful (naming your identifiers better can help with that). When I need a comment, I'm actually looking for WHYs, aka design decisions. And in this case your prompts are better than whatever comments the agent may add. (Maybe add a summary of the prompts in the commit message?)
Re:Getting Good Results from Claude Code by Xss3 on Thursday August 14, 2025 @12:52PM (#44902744)
This.

Documentation should answer WHYs not HOWs.*

* = Unless the how is a complex, opaque, or obscure algorithm. Then sometimes a written explanation can help. Sometimes that can be as simple as the name and variant, e.g. Dijkstra with k shortest path routing.