Commenting code that is removed [closed]

Answer 1

I comment unnused code because you never know when will you have to fallback on the ancient code, and maybe the old code will help other people to understand it, if it was simpler back then.

Answer 2

I also think it's a terrible suggestion :)

You should use source control and if you remove some code you can add a comment when you commit. So you still have the code history if you want...

Answer 3

Generally, code that is removed should not be commented, precisely because it clutters the codebase (and, why would one comment on something that doesn't exist?).

Your defect tracking system or source control management tools are where such comments belong.

Answer 4

Depends on the reason for removal.

I think of comments as hints for people maintaining the code in the future, if the information that the code was there but was removed can be helpful to someone maintaining the code (maybe as a "don't do that" sign) then it should be there.

Otherwise adding detailed comments with names and dates on every code change just make the whole thing unreadable.

Answer 5

If you are using any form of Source Control then this approach is somewhat redundant (as long as descriptive log messages are used)

Answer 6

As the lone dissenting voice, I will say that there is a place for commenting out code in special circumstances. Sometimes, you'll have data that continues to exist that was run through that old code and the clearest thing to do is to leave that old code in with source. In such a case I'd probably leave little note indicating why the old code was simply commented out. Any programmers coming along after would be able to understand the still extant data, without having to psychically detect the need to check old versions.

Usually though, I find commented out code completely odious and I often delete it when I come across it.