Soon after I was put in charge of the Tools and Standards group of my first big project in GTE, I discovered and enthusiastically read Jerry Weinberg’s Psychology of Computer Programming. One thing that particularly caught my attention was the experiment regarding comments in code and their effect on a debugging exercise. I had made and found a few of these myself, so I made the recommendation to my boss that we set our coding standard such that no line-by-line comments were to be used.
This meshed nicely with another standard that I was recommending, based on my discovery of a method of designing and documenting detailed designs called HIPO (Hierarchy plus Input-Process-Output), wherein the entire discussion of the code was encapsulated in a block of text we called the Prologue. There were also sections in the design documentation for internal storage variables, as well as flow charts for the logic of the component.
Much to my surprise, virtually the entire programmer workforce on the project rose in opposition to this standard, even when presented with the evidence of Jerry’s experimental results. Being supremely confident in my powers of persuasion, I even constructed a sample bit of code, with and without comments and with an injected bug, but no one was convinced, mainly because I had let the cat out of the bag when I showed them the section from the book. To further complicate the whole matter, there were programmers from 13 different nationalities on this project, so language was a further barrier to communication.
Finally, the project director declared the standard as approved and, luckily, everyone soon got used to producing documentation and code to the new pattern and project cohesion was not destroyed.
Even so, to this day I am still struck by how attached to the status quo programmers can become, maybe because of their apparent tendency toward conservative versus radical approaches.
