Comments as Last Resort

Prefer code that explains itself through structure and naming. Use comments sparingly, only where code cannot carry the intent safely.

Core Principle

Write comments to preserve information that would otherwise be lost. If the information can live in code (names, types, structure), put it in code.

What to Keep vs Remove

Remove or replace these

• Comments that restate the next line or obvious behavior
• Step-by-step narration of straightforward code
• Comments that exist only because names are vague

Action: delete them, then improve naming or extract functions until the code reads cleanly.

Keep or add these

• Contracts: inputs/outputs, invariants, error modes, side effects, performance expectations
• Why: rationale, tradeoffs, historical constraints, policy sources
• Gotchas: surprising behavior, mutation, concurrency, ordering, compatibility constraints
• Public surface docs: what callers must know to use it correctly

Action: write these as concise statements; prefer precise claims over storytelling.

Replace Comments with Code

Use comments as a smell: if you need to explain a concept, try to name the concept.

Techniques

• Rename to carry intent: functions, variables, types should express the domain meaning.
• Extract intention-revealing units: extract functions/classes/modules that name a step or rule.
• Make rules explicit: encode business rules as named predicates or policy objects instead of inline conditionals.
• Make effects explicit: separate pure computation from IO/mutation so behavior is obvious.

Review Procedure

1. Scan comments and classify each as: Contract / Why / Gotcha / Public docs / “What”.

2. For every “What” comment:

   • delete it
   • make the code readable without it via renaming and extraction

3. For Contract/Why/Gotcha/Public docs:

   • keep it short
   • ensure it matches current behavior
   • place it at the closest boundary where readers need it

4. Re-check the file top-down: the code should be understandable without narration.

Review Checklist

• No comment merely repeats the code.
• The remaining comments capture contracts, rationale, or risks.
• Naming and extraction make intent obvious.
• Public surfaces document caller-facing constraints.
• Comments and code agree; stale comments were removed or updated.