[Rcpp-devel] Unit Test Question Was: pnorm/qnorm?

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 13 September 2012 at 04:58, Christian Gunning wrote:
| On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:59 AM,
| <rcpp-devel-request at lists.r-forge.r-project.org> wrote:
| >
| > The "pixie dust" referred to your assertions that we "used some secret tools"
| > or "were hiding something".
| >
| > Neither one is true.  It's all there.  It's just damn hard to read. But it's
| > not hidden...
| 
| I'm officially of the opinion the template code is isomorphic to magic
| pixie dust:  works, works well, don't really understand it.
| I've been meaning to ask, though... what's with the conspicuous lack
| of comments in the codebase?  Is this just a terse coding style?

There are some comments in some places.  Generally speaking, not enough
though.  But if you to the sources and recurse through inst/include/ and src/
and count lines you end up with ... 60,000 lines.  That's a lot.

And a good deal of it was written by Romain in a fairly short and insanely
productive period.  And on the margin I'd rather have working code than more
documentation and less code ...

And we do have eight vignettes though (including the one you lead :-) so it's
not all lost.  And then again, if need to make a difference between
__interfaces__ which clearly documentation for users and __implementation__
which does need it less.

Dirk

-- 
Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com