TAXONOMY AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMMENTS IN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES: A QUALITY PERSPECTIVE

Comments have an important role in software development. Especially medium to large scale projects have a reasonably large code base. Useful and good quality comments play a significant part while maintaining and evolving such projects. In this work we present a taxonomy of comments based on their styles, parsing rules, recursivity, and usage. We also present quality design considerations which the programming languages should ensure so that the support of comments should be free of any side effects.

[1]  Margo I. Seltzer,et al.  Provenance: a future history , 2009, OOPSLA Companion.

[2]  M. Farooq,et al.  An Evaluation Framework and Comparative Analysis of the Widely Used First Programming Languages , 2014, PloS one.

[3]  Alberto Bacchelli,et al.  Expectations, outcomes, and challenges of modern code review , 2013, 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[4]  K. Swanson.  The Exploration , 2021, The Salons of the Republic.

[5]  Harald C. Gall,et al.  Do Code and Comments Co-Evolve? On the Relation between Source Code and Comment Changes , 2007, 14th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE 2007).

[6]  Clemente Izurieta,et al.  Effects of the number of developers on code quality in open source software: a case study , 2010, ESEM '10.

[7]  Peter Sommerlad,et al.  Retaining comments when refactoring code , 2008, OOPSLA Companion.

[8]  Peter DePasquale,et al.  Teaching students effective practices for commenting computer source code: tutorial presentation , 2010 .

[9]  David B. Benepe.  In defense of simplicity of comment syntax , 1984, SIGP.

[10]  Stuart A. Selber,et al.  Proceedings of the 17th annual international conference on Computer documentation , 1999 .

[11]  Douglas Kramer,et al.  API documentation from source code comments: a case study of Javadoc , 1999, SIGDOC '99.

[13]  Emily Hill,et al.  Towards automatically generating summary comments for Java methods , 2010, ASE.

[14]  Jef Raskin.  Comments are More Important than Code , 2005, ACM Queue.

[15]  Gail E. Harris.  Companion to the 23rd ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems languages and applications , 2008, OOPSLA 2008.

[16]  Joseph B. Weinman.  Nestable bracketed comments , 1983, SIGP.

[17]  David Notkin,et al.  Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering , 2013, ICSE 2013.

[18]  Gary T. Leavens,et al.  Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications , 2009, OOPSLA 2009.

[19]  Adnan Abid,et al.  A Framework for the Assessment of First Programming Language , 2012 .

[20]  Osamu Mizuno,et al.  Do comments explain codes adequately?: investigation by text filtering , 2011, MSR '11.

[21]  Houari A. Sahraoui,et al.  How Good is Your Comment? A Study of Comments in Java Programs , 2011, 2011 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.

[22]  K. Vairavan,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of Software Metrics and Their Relationship to Software Development Effort , 1989, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[23]  Ahmed E. Hassan,et al.  Examining the evolution of code comments in PostgreSQL , 2006, MSR '06.

[24]  Grace A. Lewis,et al.  Modernizing Legacy Systems - Software Technologies, Engineering Processes, and Business Practices , 2003, SEI series in software engineering.

[25]  Yuanyuan Zhou,et al.  /*icomment: bugs or bad comments?*/ , 2007, SOSP.

[26]  Anders Beckman,et al.  Comments considered harmful , 1977, SIGP.

[27]  Dirk Riehle,et al.  The commenting practice of open source , 2009, OOPSLA Companion.