Is “remove commented out code” correct English?Is “wait up!” considered correct English?“Toys out of the pram” expressionIs “very less” correct English?“Snapping out” vs “snapping out of it.”Why does “don't have a cow” mean “chill out” or “calm down” in American English?Is it correct to say “Getting out of schedule” or “Going out of schedule”Is “you best should run” correct English?Is 'waived it through' correct English?Phrase which means to “code in” a programming language“Out of respect” versus other “out of”
Twin primes whose sum is a cube
Stopping power of mountain vs road bike
Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?
Will google still index a page if I use a $_SESSION variable?
What does it mean to describe someone as a butt steak?
How can I prevent hyper evolved versions of regular creatures from wiping out their cousins?
A reference to a well-known characterization of scattered compact spaces
Why is consensus so controversial in Britain?
I Accidentally Deleted a Stock Terminal Theme
Why is Collection not simply treated as Collection<?>
Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?
Why are electrically insulating heatsinks so rare? Is it just cost?
Why doesn't H₄O²⁺ exist?
How to take photos in burst mode, without vibration?
Why is the 'in' operator throwing an error with a string literal instead of logging false?
Why can't we play rap on piano?
Intersection of two sorted vectors in C++
1960's book about a plague that kills all white people
How can I make my BBEG immortal short of making them a Lich or Vampire?
Modeling an IP Address
Is the Joker left-handed?
Why is it a bad idea to hire a hitman to eliminate most corrupt politicians?
Theorems that impeded progress
Can a virus destroy the BIOS of a modern computer?
Is “remove commented out code” correct English?
Is “wait up!” considered correct English?“Toys out of the pram” expressionIs “very less” correct English?“Snapping out” vs “snapping out of it.”Why does “don't have a cow” mean “chill out” or “calm down” in American English?Is it correct to say “Getting out of schedule” or “Going out of schedule”Is “you best should run” correct English?Is 'waived it through' correct English?Phrase which means to “code in” a programming language“Out of respect” versus other “out of”
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
As a programmer, I often use the term "Remove commented out code" as a commit message when checking in code. I wonder whether this is correct English.
To use an example outside the realm of programming, consider these two phrases for contrast:
"Help the poor people"
"Help the left behind people"
The first seems reasonable, while the second sounds clunky. Is it grammatically correct? I assume it could be said better.
What about my initial example? Is there a better way to phrase it or is it ok?
expressions
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 15 more comments
As a programmer, I often use the term "Remove commented out code" as a commit message when checking in code. I wonder whether this is correct English.
To use an example outside the realm of programming, consider these two phrases for contrast:
"Help the poor people"
"Help the left behind people"
The first seems reasonable, while the second sounds clunky. Is it grammatically correct? I assume it could be said better.
What about my initial example? Is there a better way to phrase it or is it ok?
expressions
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
8
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
11
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
9
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
3
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
4
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday
|
show 15 more comments
As a programmer, I often use the term "Remove commented out code" as a commit message when checking in code. I wonder whether this is correct English.
To use an example outside the realm of programming, consider these two phrases for contrast:
"Help the poor people"
"Help the left behind people"
The first seems reasonable, while the second sounds clunky. Is it grammatically correct? I assume it could be said better.
What about my initial example? Is there a better way to phrase it or is it ok?
expressions
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
As a programmer, I often use the term "Remove commented out code" as a commit message when checking in code. I wonder whether this is correct English.
To use an example outside the realm of programming, consider these two phrases for contrast:
"Help the poor people"
"Help the left behind people"
The first seems reasonable, while the second sounds clunky. Is it grammatically correct? I assume it could be said better.
What about my initial example? Is there a better way to phrase it or is it ok?
expressions
expressions
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
asked yesterday
CernoCerno
17615
17615
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Cerno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
8
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
11
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
9
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
3
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
4
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday
|
show 15 more comments
8
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
11
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
9
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
3
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
4
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday
8
8
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
11
11
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
9
9
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
3
3
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
4
4
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday
|
show 15 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
There is a better way to phrase it, but it's also OK. That is to say, in contexts other than a commit message, you would probably want to rewrite the sentence, but for an internal note, it's fine.
The main issue with the sentence is that you're using commented out as a compound adjective and so you should probably hyphenate the phrase: "Remove the commented-out code." Hyphenation would also improve your last example sentence: "Help the left-behind people" is better, but "Help the people who were left behind" is better still.
If I were trying to express the idea of your commit message in a more formal context, a context where prose style is important, or really any context without a strict and low character limit, I would write, "Remove the code which was commented out."
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
|
show 11 more comments
Commit summaries (the single first line of a commit, and often the entire message) are a defined genre of technical speech because they have a specific role of identifying changes in a big list of changes and are limited to a certain number of characters. In particular, they are usually written in imperative ("Remove" vs. "Removed") and in headlinese for the same goal of fitting information into a limited space. Thus these are all considered helpful commit summaries:
- Remove commented-out code
- Refactor foo service
- Add new SMS implementation for Bar Mobile
As noted elsewhere, "commented-out" should be hyphenated as it's a phrasal adjective; otherwise, the way you're phrasing it is stylistically preferred for this specific context.
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On usersis too long and it will cut of atallow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.
– VLAZ
22 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
Just to add the pedantic view, 'out' is essentially redundant.
'Remove commented code' works, or to more accurately explain the commit 'Remove obsolete code' is probably better.
Having said that, 'commented out' is pretty much an industry term. If you wish to keep the 'out' (to differentiate from regular language comments that assist future readers, as opposed to comments that hide code from the compiler, I suppose), I see no need to hyphenate the term. It is common enough (especially among your target audience: commit log readers) to be immediately recognised and doesn't create ambiguity when left un-hyphenated.
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
protected by Andrew Leach♦ yesterday
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There is a better way to phrase it, but it's also OK. That is to say, in contexts other than a commit message, you would probably want to rewrite the sentence, but for an internal note, it's fine.
The main issue with the sentence is that you're using commented out as a compound adjective and so you should probably hyphenate the phrase: "Remove the commented-out code." Hyphenation would also improve your last example sentence: "Help the left-behind people" is better, but "Help the people who were left behind" is better still.
If I were trying to express the idea of your commit message in a more formal context, a context where prose style is important, or really any context without a strict and low character limit, I would write, "Remove the code which was commented out."
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
|
show 11 more comments
There is a better way to phrase it, but it's also OK. That is to say, in contexts other than a commit message, you would probably want to rewrite the sentence, but for an internal note, it's fine.
The main issue with the sentence is that you're using commented out as a compound adjective and so you should probably hyphenate the phrase: "Remove the commented-out code." Hyphenation would also improve your last example sentence: "Help the left-behind people" is better, but "Help the people who were left behind" is better still.
If I were trying to express the idea of your commit message in a more formal context, a context where prose style is important, or really any context without a strict and low character limit, I would write, "Remove the code which was commented out."
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
|
show 11 more comments
There is a better way to phrase it, but it's also OK. That is to say, in contexts other than a commit message, you would probably want to rewrite the sentence, but for an internal note, it's fine.
The main issue with the sentence is that you're using commented out as a compound adjective and so you should probably hyphenate the phrase: "Remove the commented-out code." Hyphenation would also improve your last example sentence: "Help the left-behind people" is better, but "Help the people who were left behind" is better still.
If I were trying to express the idea of your commit message in a more formal context, a context where prose style is important, or really any context without a strict and low character limit, I would write, "Remove the code which was commented out."
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
There is a better way to phrase it, but it's also OK. That is to say, in contexts other than a commit message, you would probably want to rewrite the sentence, but for an internal note, it's fine.
The main issue with the sentence is that you're using commented out as a compound adjective and so you should probably hyphenate the phrase: "Remove the commented-out code." Hyphenation would also improve your last example sentence: "Help the left-behind people" is better, but "Help the people who were left behind" is better still.
If I were trying to express the idea of your commit message in a more formal context, a context where prose style is important, or really any context without a strict and low character limit, I would write, "Remove the code which was commented out."
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
answered yesterday
JuhaszJuhasz
3,2581814
3,2581814
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
|
show 11 more comments
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
75
75
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
Your answer is grammatically correct, but it misses an important fact: "commented-out code" is idiomatic in the relevant domain of expertise. The phrase is widely used and well understood by programmers. I would not have a problem using it even in a formal context. Because "commented-out code" is idiomatic, "code which was commented out" is unnecessarily wordy and may intone smugness.
– jpmc26
yesterday
12
12
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
@Juhasz "User login" is a synonym for "account," not a user in the logged in state. The idiomatic short phrase for "users who are logged in" would be "authenticated users." "Logged-in users" would be recognizable but not idiomatic. More relevant to this question, "users who are authenticated" would certainly sound strange in most contexts. I'm not sure what the rest has to do with reformulating the phrase into "the code which was commented out."
– jpmc26
yesterday
10
10
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
Maybe it's just me, but for programming specifically, I'll agree and say "Remove the commented-out code" is better for a commit message. If the commit message was "Remove the code which was commented out" it leads me to sit and think, did mean that you removed code (for all practical purposes) by commenting it out? Or was there code, commented out, and was removed?
– BruceWayne
yesterday
5
5
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
@jpmc26 Ack, be careful about universalizing your own dialect. Your criticisms are all correct, but "user login" is an event (a "user account" is just that), "logged-in users" is perfectly idiomatic (authentication can be performed in other ways, such as with OAuth), and using an adjective like "authenticated" in an adjective clause has more to do with the train of thought of the speaker than style.
– chrylis
yesterday
4
4
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
Commit messages and idiomatic jargon are pretty far away from formal writing, there's no conflict here. Use "commented-out code" in your commits, tweets, and emails, use more formal language in your presentation to the Queen of Sweden.
– barbecue
yesterday
|
show 11 more comments
Commit summaries (the single first line of a commit, and often the entire message) are a defined genre of technical speech because they have a specific role of identifying changes in a big list of changes and are limited to a certain number of characters. In particular, they are usually written in imperative ("Remove" vs. "Removed") and in headlinese for the same goal of fitting information into a limited space. Thus these are all considered helpful commit summaries:
- Remove commented-out code
- Refactor foo service
- Add new SMS implementation for Bar Mobile
As noted elsewhere, "commented-out" should be hyphenated as it's a phrasal adjective; otherwise, the way you're phrasing it is stylistically preferred for this specific context.
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On usersis too long and it will cut of atallow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.
– VLAZ
22 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
Commit summaries (the single first line of a commit, and often the entire message) are a defined genre of technical speech because they have a specific role of identifying changes in a big list of changes and are limited to a certain number of characters. In particular, they are usually written in imperative ("Remove" vs. "Removed") and in headlinese for the same goal of fitting information into a limited space. Thus these are all considered helpful commit summaries:
- Remove commented-out code
- Refactor foo service
- Add new SMS implementation for Bar Mobile
As noted elsewhere, "commented-out" should be hyphenated as it's a phrasal adjective; otherwise, the way you're phrasing it is stylistically preferred for this specific context.
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On usersis too long and it will cut of atallow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.
– VLAZ
22 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
Commit summaries (the single first line of a commit, and often the entire message) are a defined genre of technical speech because they have a specific role of identifying changes in a big list of changes and are limited to a certain number of characters. In particular, they are usually written in imperative ("Remove" vs. "Removed") and in headlinese for the same goal of fitting information into a limited space. Thus these are all considered helpful commit summaries:
- Remove commented-out code
- Refactor foo service
- Add new SMS implementation for Bar Mobile
As noted elsewhere, "commented-out" should be hyphenated as it's a phrasal adjective; otherwise, the way you're phrasing it is stylistically preferred for this specific context.
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
Commit summaries (the single first line of a commit, and often the entire message) are a defined genre of technical speech because they have a specific role of identifying changes in a big list of changes and are limited to a certain number of characters. In particular, they are usually written in imperative ("Remove" vs. "Removed") and in headlinese for the same goal of fitting information into a limited space. Thus these are all considered helpful commit summaries:
- Remove commented-out code
- Refactor foo service
- Add new SMS implementation for Bar Mobile
As noted elsewhere, "commented-out" should be hyphenated as it's a phrasal adjective; otherwise, the way you're phrasing it is stylistically preferred for this specific context.
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
edited 5 hours ago
JJJ
6,222102646
6,222102646
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
answered yesterday
chrylischrylis
66257
66257
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On usersis too long and it will cut of atallow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.
– VLAZ
22 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On usersis too long and it will cut of atallow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.
– VLAZ
22 hours ago
4
4
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
@CJDennis It's not really harmful to do that, but it's more important to keep to 72 characters than to add lubricant.
– chrylis
yesterday
2
2
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
Who says that in the 21st century it's important to not go above 72 characters? My commit messages sometimes have single lines longer than 72 characters, and a total count of thousands of characters without issues.
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
7
7
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
@CJDennis It's fine on commit messages; I sometimes write multiple paragraphs. The commit summary, on the other hand, is processed by tons of tooling, and GitHub, for example, will truncate it.
– chrylis
yesterday
1
1
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
From what I've seen, GitHub doesn't truncate it (i.e. only store the first 72 characters), but in certain limited views it will show the first 72 characters as a preview. The full text is visible in a different view. My advice is that if you need more than 72 characters, use them! A 100 character commit summary (without irrelevancies) is unlikely to go under 72 characters by changing it to "headlinese".
– CJ Dennis
yesterday
5
5
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -
FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On users is too long and it will cut of at allow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.– VLAZ
22 hours ago
@CJDennis you can use as many characters as you want in a message but 72 is the standard for headings which is the first line. I don't want to go back and forth between views to know what the summary of the message is -
FEAT1234: Making changes to the authentication procedure to allow for Single Sign-On users is too long and it will cut of at allow for S. OK, I made this a bit too word-y but the idea is that a descriptive doesn't really fit. A message of "Change authentication for SSO users" is enough as a heading - write an essay as the message, if you want.– VLAZ
22 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
Just to add the pedantic view, 'out' is essentially redundant.
'Remove commented code' works, or to more accurately explain the commit 'Remove obsolete code' is probably better.
Having said that, 'commented out' is pretty much an industry term. If you wish to keep the 'out' (to differentiate from regular language comments that assist future readers, as opposed to comments that hide code from the compiler, I suppose), I see no need to hyphenate the term. It is common enough (especially among your target audience: commit log readers) to be immediately recognised and doesn't create ambiguity when left un-hyphenated.
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Just to add the pedantic view, 'out' is essentially redundant.
'Remove commented code' works, or to more accurately explain the commit 'Remove obsolete code' is probably better.
Having said that, 'commented out' is pretty much an industry term. If you wish to keep the 'out' (to differentiate from regular language comments that assist future readers, as opposed to comments that hide code from the compiler, I suppose), I see no need to hyphenate the term. It is common enough (especially among your target audience: commit log readers) to be immediately recognised and doesn't create ambiguity when left un-hyphenated.
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Just to add the pedantic view, 'out' is essentially redundant.
'Remove commented code' works, or to more accurately explain the commit 'Remove obsolete code' is probably better.
Having said that, 'commented out' is pretty much an industry term. If you wish to keep the 'out' (to differentiate from regular language comments that assist future readers, as opposed to comments that hide code from the compiler, I suppose), I see no need to hyphenate the term. It is common enough (especially among your target audience: commit log readers) to be immediately recognised and doesn't create ambiguity when left un-hyphenated.
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
Just to add the pedantic view, 'out' is essentially redundant.
'Remove commented code' works, or to more accurately explain the commit 'Remove obsolete code' is probably better.
Having said that, 'commented out' is pretty much an industry term. If you wish to keep the 'out' (to differentiate from regular language comments that assist future readers, as opposed to comments that hide code from the compiler, I suppose), I see no need to hyphenate the term. It is common enough (especially among your target audience: commit log readers) to be immediately recognised and doesn't create ambiguity when left un-hyphenated.
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
answered yesterday
mcalexmcalex
723511
723511
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
10
10
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
'commented out' is pretty much an industry term — Right. And unfortunately for your first paragraph, so is 'commented code'! Commented code (especially well commented code) is a pro, not a con. "Gallant's code is commented. Goofus's code is commented out." (So "Remove commented code" would be less technically correct, but of course a human reader would supply the missing "out" from context.)
– Quuxplusone
23 hours ago
1
1
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
I agree generally, but I'd argue the term you refer to is just 'commented'. A non-dev looking over my shoulder asked what all the different VS colours were for. After going through identifiers, key words, strings etc, I said all the dark green stuff was simply commented code (which included both informative stuff and bits I hadn't gotten rid of yet). Strictly speaking the comments you refer to aren't code - as in, if you removed the comment symbols, the compiler would probably throw up syntax errors. I did mention pedantry, yeah?
– mcalex
22 hours ago
21
21
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
Most people I know would consider "commented code" to refer to code that has comments in it, and "commented-out code" to refer to code that is put between comment markings in order to make the compiler/interpreter ignore it. They are not synonyms in the common usage that I know, so the "out" is not redundant. In fact, "comment out" is a phrasal verb modelled on "cross out", "scratch out", and "rub out", all of which have quite distinct meanings if "out" is omitted.
– Robert Furber
19 hours ago
12
12
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
I agree with the other commenters. To me "commented-out code" has a very different meaning from "commented code". The latter meaning code that includes comments, the former being code that has become a comment and is now obsolete. They are not synonymous.
– user2705196
17 hours ago
2
2
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
I agree, so this answer is wrong: "commented code" and "commented-out code" are different things. What is more, "obsolete code" is different yet again: it usually won't have been commented out.
– reinierpost
11 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
protected by Andrew Leach♦ yesterday
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
8
I think your audience will know exactly what you mean, which is the crucial criterion for a commit message. Beyond that, I don't know of any more descriptive adjective than "commented-out".
– user888379
yesterday
11
It would be typical of communications between computer nerds. The anal retentive ones, however, might insist on hyphenating "commented-out".
– Hot Licks
yesterday
9
@GrahamBorland Dead code is not the same as commented-out code. Dead code is not commented out, but can never be executed - sometimes for a reason which depends on information and logic which are not contained in the code itself.
– alephzero
yesterday
3
And commented-out code is clearly unreachable; dead code can be much, much harder to identify.
– chepner
yesterday
4
Since I treat those comments as what I did I would say “removeD...”
– Jim
yesterday