Shortcuts in OOP

[blahblahblahh]

I believe there should be two types of comments, one for programmers that would like to do something weird these shouldn’t be in JavaDocs, and the other type for general use.
to erikd. Hand generated are better. ~_^

Right. It’s called a “manual” and open source might actually be mostly usable (rahter than mostly unusable, with a few gems) if more open source “programmers” knew about these amazing artifacts and how to write them.

/me ducks and runs for cover

[K.I.L.E.R]

How would I unroll that in Eclipse?

The answer is really “only if your IDE has a one-click function to unroll it for you” because in real development you very often have to unroll those things later on when you’re maintaining / updating / adding new features.

Most IDE’s do this these days (yes?) so it’s not a problem.

[Raghar]

So … what?
I have no idea what spiders are, and I’ve no idea what you’re saying here. Are you trying to defend a 4k line class?

There are several areas that requires a nasty large code, and complex one on top of that. These are some algorithms from image processing, handling interactions between 1 mill+ entities, handling and analysis of a geographic data, and sometimes also the smart AI.

For example:
I seen a 1000 line implementation of DCT. (My implementation of DCT isn’t as large, but it needs 2000 operations per load.) There are much more code intensive algorithms however.

Spiders is name for… Let’s suppose you’d have these data: “1324”, and you need to convert that into this “1234”. You’d select one of methods that is called spider.

[swpalmer]

[quote]Spiders is name for… Let’s suppose you’d have these data: “1324”, and you need to convert that into this “1234”. You’d select one of methods that is called spider.
[/quote]
That almost entirely fails to explain in the slightest way what you mean by a ‘spider’.

All I got out of it was a spider is a method that manipulates data. Hmm… I think all of my methods are spiders.

[system]

I often use this style, espcially when using a special algorithm, or encoding/decoding custom file formats. This way I can use/read/write the code on the left, and quick read down the right column to see what it does.

It works great in practice, because when you’re in the code, and you know what it does, your eyes don’t have to dodge around extraneous documentation just to find/fix bugs. And yet, when you go back to a custom algorithm after a year of not looking at it, you can get a quick understanding of both the overview and details of the method in question.

http://members.cox.net/jlunt/code.jpg

This is actually an out-of-date image. For those of you who actually read the code, you’ll notice that the IOException is not documented, and that the @throws comment is not entirely accurate. And that’s exactly what code reviews are for!