I think it should be noted that "genuine accomplishments" do not always relate to higher wages. This is a poor assumption on the author's part that only things which are "genuine accomplishment's" are things which lead to getting paid.

Focusing in on the paper, I think the author's main idea is a fairly good one. Currently the common conception of commenting, or of documenting one's program, is very negative. There are many reasons for this, but given the context of the environment which this is true (school) it is not so strange. Most classes, while they give a small nod in the direction of commenting, grade solely on design and function. Documentation is not taught as an integral part.

As this is where many people tend to learn the programming trade, documentation tends to be overlooked in the industry, or wherever it is practiced. As the author notes, documentation is more than a topical application to a program; it is actually an intertwined part of the programming process which actually affects the program in an important way.

What the author states is that by using his technique which incorporates documentation into the programming process, one becomes more careful and thoughtful of one's program. No longer do people take possibly harmful shortcuts "imposed by the language." Given a language in which documentation plays just as an important part as the actual code, one is free to to fully program all aspects of a program to their fullest completion.

I think the author's inclusion of the PRIMES program in WEB was a bad idea. It just served to confuse and tire me. I think it would have best served as an appendix.

All in all I think the author has a good idea to share with the computing world.

MY COMMENTS

I agree that documentation is a very important skill that is all to often overlooked, but the development of a language that intertwines documentation and actual code sounds like a nightmare for CS education. Trying to learn one programming language is hard enough for beginners, two languages mixed together would not only be difficult to learn, but would also not be useful outside of the environment that they were taught in. I think documentation languages are best left for people to learn when they ar e placed in a working environment that requires their use.

MY COMMENTS

I'll agree that commenting is an essential aspect of successful programming, but I believe that this document argued against itself. I was unable to follow both the argument and the actual documentation of the WEB code in order to figure out what was going on. This "language" albeit a masterpiece according to the author, is not as intuitive as a two-headed language should be. It did not inform me about the program. There is my beef!

MY COMMENTS

As I mentionned in Adam's reaction, I think that we forget that people do not comprehend what should be documented. Without an understanding of what to comment, tools are no good.

And I agree, the PRIMES confused the living heck out of me...

MY COMMENTS

I think that I was confused...I thought that the purpose of this type of programming was not to make documentation more simple but coding itself more simple. While you may be able to kill two brids with one stone...I'm still a little confused.