Hope I am not starting a religious war, but... I have found the idiom of "I " much easier to parse and edit rather than "A Dude is xxxxxxxxx" when entering class comments. With the former, I just position the mouse and start typing: 'I ' -> 'I act as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess'. With the latter, I must delete the 'is xxxxxxxxx' before I start commenting: 'A Dude is xxxxxxxxx ' -> 'A Dude acts as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess' The mental flow for the former is "think", "type". The mental flow for the latter is "grrrrrr", "edit" , "think" , "type" The former offers the opportunity for different verbs right off the bat: "I am ", "I act" , "I perform " , "I flail" The latter requires we ponder the suitability of the verb "is", accept or reject its suitability (This is the time sink for me) , think of a new verb if rejected, delete the verb and type the verb. Scanning the Kernel-Class package, there is a lot of history surrounding Class comments so I can take the answer 'no' gracefully. 'yes' would be good, however. (: cheers. tty |
That's a good point from the perspective of making the physical entry
of a class comment easier. A default comment of "I " would saves two keystrokes per class comment (instead of having to type Command+a, "I "). The only possible disadvantage I can think of would be for newbies. Simply, "I ", as a default comment does not provide an exemplar that reveals the purpose of that pane as much as "A Dude is xxxxx". A lone "I " there might appear to them as something incomplete or a bug. Maybe a balloon help on that pane explaining it could alleviate that issue.. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:41 AM, gettimothy <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hope I am not starting a religious war, but... > > I have found the idiom of "I " much easier to parse and edit rather than "A > Dude is xxxxxxxxx" when entering class comments. > > With the former, I just position the mouse and start typing: 'I ' -> 'I act > as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess'. > With the latter, I must delete the 'is xxxxxxxxx' before I start commenting: > 'A Dude is xxxxxxxxx ' -> 'A Dude acts as a formal frabulator for the > system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess' > > The mental flow for the former is "think", "type". > The mental flow for the latter is "grrrrrr", "edit" , "think" , "type" > > The former offers the opportunity for different verbs right off the bat: "I > am ", "I act" , "I perform " , "I flail" > The latter requires we ponder the suitability of the verb "is", accept or > reject its suitability (This is the time sink for me) , think of a new verb > if rejected, delete the verb and type the verb. > > > Scanning the Kernel-Class package, there is a lot of history surrounding > Class comments so I can take the answer 'no' gracefully. 'yes' would be > good, however. (: > > cheers. > > > tty > > > > > > > > > > > |
In reply to this post by tty
That's a good point from the perspective of making the physical entry
of a class comment easier. A default comment of "I " would saves two keystrokes per class comment (instead of having to type Command+a, "I "). The only possible disadvantage I can think of would be for newbies. Simply, "I ", as a default comment does not provide an exemplar that reveals the purpose of that pane as much as "A Dude is xxxxx". A lone "I " there might appear to them as something incomplete or a bug. Maybe a balloon help on that pane explaining it could alleviate that issue.. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:41 AM, gettimothy <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hope I am not starting a religious war, but... > > I have found the idiom of "I " much easier to parse and edit rather than "A > Dude is xxxxxxxxx" when entering class comments. > > With the former, I just position the mouse and start typing: 'I ' -> 'I act > as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess'. > With the latter, I must delete the 'is xxxxxxxxx' before I start commenting: > 'A Dude is xxxxxxxxx ' -> 'A Dude acts as a formal frabulator for the > system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess' > > The mental flow for the former is "think", "type". > The mental flow for the latter is "grrrrrr", "edit" , "think" , "type" > > The former offers the opportunity for different verbs right off the bat: "I > am ", "I act" , "I perform " , "I flail" > The latter requires we ponder the suitability of the verb "is", accept or > reject its suitability (This is the time sink for me) , think of a new verb > if rejected, delete the verb and type the verb. > > > Scanning the Kernel-Class package, there is a lot of history surrounding > Class comments so I can take the answer 'no' gracefully. 'yes' would be > good, however. (: > > cheers. > > > tty > > > > > > > > > > > |
Make it a question:
Hi, this is ClassName, what do I do? Best -Tobias On 11.05.2014, at 17:49, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote: > That's a good point from the perspective of making the physical entry > of a class comment easier. A default comment of "I " would saves two > keystrokes per class comment (instead of having to type Command+a, "I > "). > > The only possible disadvantage I can think of would be for newbies. > Simply, "I ", as a default comment does not provide an exemplar that > reveals the purpose of that pane as much as "A Dude is xxxxx". A lone > "I " there might appear to them as something incomplete or a bug. > Maybe a balloon help on that pane explaining it could alleviate that > issue.. > > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:41 AM, gettimothy <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hope I am not starting a religious war, but... >> >> I have found the idiom of "I " much easier to parse and edit rather than "A >> Dude is xxxxxxxxx" when entering class comments. >> >> With the former, I just position the mouse and start typing: 'I ' -> 'I act >> as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess'. >> With the latter, I must delete the 'is xxxxxxxxx' before I start commenting: >> 'A Dude is xxxxxxxxx ' -> 'A Dude acts as a formal frabulator for the >> system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess' >> >> The mental flow for the former is "think", "type". >> The mental flow for the latter is "grrrrrr", "edit" , "think" , "type" >> >> The former offers the opportunity for different verbs right off the bat: "I >> am ", "I act" , "I perform " , "I flail" >> The latter requires we ponder the suitability of the verb "is", accept or >> reject its suitability (This is the time sink for me) , think of a new verb >> if rejected, delete the verb and type the verb. >> >> >> Scanning the Kernel-Class package, there is a lot of history surrounding >> Class comments so I can take the answer 'no' gracefully. 'yes' would be >> good, however. (: >> >> cheers. >> >> >> tty >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > signature.asc (1K) Download Attachment |
And make it configurable...
- Francisco > On 11 May 2014, at 17:05, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Make it a question: > > > Hi, this is ClassName, what do I do? > > Best > -Tobias > >> On 11.05.2014, at 17:49, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> That's a good point from the perspective of making the physical entry >> of a class comment easier. A default comment of "I " would saves two >> keystrokes per class comment (instead of having to type Command+a, "I >> "). >> >> The only possible disadvantage I can think of would be for newbies. >> Simply, "I ", as a default comment does not provide an exemplar that >> reveals the purpose of that pane as much as "A Dude is xxxxx". A lone >> "I " there might appear to them as something incomplete or a bug. >> Maybe a balloon help on that pane explaining it could alleviate that >> issue.. >> >>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:41 AM, gettimothy <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Hope I am not starting a religious war, but... >>> >>> I have found the idiom of "I " much easier to parse and edit rather than "A >>> Dude is xxxxxxxxx" when entering class comments. >>> >>> With the former, I just position the mouse and start typing: 'I ' -> 'I act >>> as a formal frabulator for the system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess'. >>> With the latter, I must delete the 'is xxxxxxxxx' before I start commenting: >>> 'A Dude is xxxxxxxxx ' -> 'A Dude acts as a formal frabulator for the >>> system frisbnitsk decompulation subprocess' >>> >>> The mental flow for the former is "think", "type". >>> The mental flow for the latter is "grrrrrr", "edit" , "think" , "type" >>> >>> The former offers the opportunity for different verbs right off the bat: "I >>> am ", "I act" , "I perform " , "I flail" >>> The latter requires we ponder the suitability of the verb "is", accept or >>> reject its suitability (This is the time sink for me) , think of a new verb >>> if rejected, delete the verb and type the verb. >>> >>> >>> Scanning the Kernel-Class package, there is a lot of history surrounding >>> Class comments so I can take the answer 'no' gracefully. 'yes' would be >>> good, however. (: >>> >>> cheers. >>> >>> >>> tty > > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |