Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make TODO comments more specific and prune them #1311

Open
kohr-h opened this issue Mar 11, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

Make TODO comments more specific and prune them #1311

kohr-h opened this issue Mar 11, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

@kohr-h
Copy link
Member

kohr-h commented Mar 11, 2018

During my repr improvement work, I've also gone though a bunch of TODO comments that just made me scratch my head. Stuff like TODO: update docs... okay, how? (That one was by me btw).

So I'd propose that we be more specific when writing comments like this, and make such comments easier to search. Here's my suggestion:

  • Write # TODO(<username>): ... for generic comments on implementation details, suboptimal code, reasons for not implementing things etc. This way it's at least clear whom to ask what the comment was about.
  • Write # TODO(#<issue number>): ... for TODOs that have an issue attached to them, for instance "do this when something gets available/fixed".
  • Update # TODO(#<issue number>): ... -> # TODO(doable, #<issue number>): ... when the issue has been closed in the meanwhile. This update should be done for every issue that gets closed, a simple text search brings up the candidates (see above).
  • Write # TODO(PR #<PR number>): ... for something that will be addressed by a PR that's underway.
  • For upstream issues, write # TODO(<package> #...) with PR or issue as above.
@kohr-h kohr-h changed the title Make TODO comments more specific Make TODO comments more specific and prune them Sep 11, 2018
@adler-j adler-j mentioned this issue Sep 11, 2018
20 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant