Hubbry Logo
Comment (computer programming)Comment (computer programming)Main
Open search
Comment (computer programming)
Community hub
Comment (computer programming)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Comment (computer programming)
Comment (computer programming)
from Wikipedia
Java source code with block comments in red, line comments in green and program code in blue.

In computer programming, a comment is text embedded in source code that a translator (compiler or interpreter) ignores. Generally, a comment is an annotation intended to make the code easier for a programmer to understand – often explaining an aspect that is not readily apparent in the program (non-comment) code.[1] For this article, comment refers to the same concept in a programming language, markup language, configuration file and any similar context.[2] Some development tools, other than a source code translator, do parse comments to provide capabilities such as API document generation, static analysis, and version control integration. The syntax of comments varies by programming language yet there are repeating patterns in the syntax among languages as well as similar aspects related to comment content.

The flexibility supported by comments allows for a wide degree of content style variability. To promote uniformity, style conventions are commonly part of a programming style guide. But, best practices are disputed and contradictory.[3][4]

Common attributes

[edit]

Support for code comments is defined by each programming language. The features differ by language, but there are several common attributes that apply throughout.

Most languages support multi-line block (a.k.a. stream) and/or single line comments. A block comment is delimited with text that marks the start and end of comment text. It can span multiple lines or occupy any part of a line. Some languages allow block comments to be recursively nested inside one another, but others do not.[5][6][7] A line comment ends at the end of the text line. In modern languages, a line comment starts with a delimiter but some older languages designate a column at which subsequent text is considered comment.[7] Many languages support both block and line comments – using different delimiters for each. For example, C, C++ and their many derivatives support block comments delimited by /* and */ and line comments delimited by //. Other languages support only one type of comment.[7]

Comments can also be classified as either prologue or inline based on their position and content relative to program code. A prologue comment is a comment (or group of related comments) located near the top of an associated programming topic, such as before a symbol declaration or at the top of a file. An inline comment is a comment that is located on the same line as and to the right of program code to which is refers.[8] Both prologue and inline comments can be represented as either line or block comments. For example:

/*
 * prologue block comment
 */
bool foo() {
     return true; /* inline block comment */
}

//
// prologue line comment
//
bool bar() {
     return false; // inline line comment
}

Examples of use

[edit]

Describe intent

[edit]

Comments can explain the author's intent – why the code is as it is. Some contend that describing what the code does is superfluous. The need to explain the what is a sign that it is too complex and should be re-worked.

"Don't document bad code – rewrite it."[9]
"Good comments don't repeat the code or explain it. They clarify its intent. Comments should explain, at a higher level of abstraction than the code, what you're trying to do."[10]

Highlight unusual practice

[edit]

Comments may explain why a choice was made to write code that is counter to convention or best practice. For example:

' Second variable dim because of server errors produced when reuse form data.
' No documentation available on server behavior issue, so just coding around it.
vtx = server.mappath("local settings")

The example below explains why an insertion sort was chosen instead of a quicksort, as the former is, in theory, slower than the latter.

 list = [f (b), f (b), f (c), f (d), f (a), ...];
 // Need a stable sort. Besides, the performance really does not matter.
 insertion_sort (list);

Describe algorithm

[edit]

Comments can describe an algorithm as pseudocode. This could be done before writing the code as a first draft. If left in the code, it can simplify code review by allowing comparison of the resulting code with the intended logic. For example:

/* loop backwards through all elements returned by the server 
(they should be processed chronologically)*/
for (i = (numElementsReturned - 0); i >= 1; i--) {
    /* process each element's data */
    updatePattern(i, returnedElements[i]);
}

Sometimes code contains a novel or noteworthy solution that warrants an explanatory comment. Such explanations might be lengthy and include diagrams and formal mathematical proofs. This may describe what the code does rather than intent, but may be useful for maintaining the code. This might apply for highly specialized problem domains or rarely used optimizations, constructs or function-calls.[11]

Reference

[edit]

When some aspect of the code is based on information in an external reference, comments link to the reference. For example as a URL or book name and page number.

Comment out

[edit]

A common developer practice is to comment out one or more lines of code. The programmer adds comment syntax that converts program code into comments so that what was executable code will no longer be executed at runtime. Sometimes this technique is used to find the cause of a bug. By systematically commenting out and running parts of the program, the offending source code can be located.

Many IDEs support adding and removing comments with convenient user interface such as a keyboard shortcut.

Store metadata

[edit]

Comments can store metadata about the code. Common metadata includes the name of the original author and subsequent maintainers, dates when first written and modified, link to development and user documentation, and legal information such as copyright and software license. Rarely, text-encoded. binary data can be included.

Some programming tools write metadata into the code as comments.[12] For example, a version control tool might write metadata such as author, date and version number into each file when it's committed to the repository.[13]

Integrate with development tools

[edit]

Sometimes information stored in comments is used by development tools other than the translator – the primary tool that consumes the code. This information may include metadata (often used by a documentation generator) or tool configuration.

Some source code editors support configuration via metadata in comments.[14] One particular example is the modeline feature of Vim which configures tab character handling. For example:

# vim: tabstop=8 expandtab shiftwidth=4 softtabstop=4

Support documentation generation

[edit]

An API documentation generator parses information from a codebase to generate API documentation. Many support reading information from comments, often parsing metadata, to control the content and formatting of the resulting document.

Although some claim that API documentation can be higher quality when written in a more traditional and manual way, some claim that storing documentation information in code comments simplifies the documenting process, as well as increases the likelihood that the documentation will be kept up to date.[15] Examples include Javadoc, Ddoc, Doxygen, Visual Expert and PHPDoc. Forms of docstring are supported by Python, Lisp, Elixir, and Clojure.[16] C#, F# and Visual Basic .NET implement a similar feature called "XML Comments" which are read by IntelliSense from the compiled .NET assembly.[17]

Visualization

[edit]

An ASCII art visualization such as a logo, diagram, or flowchart can be included in a comment.[18]

The following code fragment depicts the process flow of a system administration script (Windows script file). Although a section marking the code appears as a comment, the diagram is in an XML CDATA section, which is technically not a comment, but serves the same purpose here.[19] Although this diagram could be in a comment, the example illustrates one instance where the programmer opted not to use a comment as a way of including resources in source code.[19]

<!-- begin: wsf_resource_nodes -->
<resource id="ProcessDiagram000">
<![CDATA[
 HostApp (Main_process)
    |
    V
script.wsf (app_cmd) --> ClientApp (async_run, batch_process)
                |
                |
                V
         mru.ini (mru_history)  
]]>
</resource>

Document development process

[edit]

Sometimes, comments describe development processes related to the code. For example, comments might describe how to build the code or how to submit changes to the software maintainer.

Extend language syntax

[edit]

Occasionally, code that is formatted as a comment is overloaded to convey additional information to the translator, such as conditional comments. As such, syntax that generally indicates a comment can actually represent program code; not comment code. Such syntax may be a practical way to maintain compatibility while adding additional functionality, but some regard such a solution as a kludge.[20]

Other examples include interpreter directives:

  • The Unix "shebang" – #! – used on the first line of a script to point to the interpreter to be used.
  • "Magic comments" identifying the encoding a source file is using,[21] e.g. Python's PEP 263.[22]

The script below for a Unix-like system shows both of these uses:

#!/usr/bin/env python3
# -*- coding: UTF-8 -*-
print("Testing")

The gcc compiler (since 2017) looks for a comment in a switch statement if a case falls-thru to the next case. If an explicit indication of fall-thru is not found, then the compiler issues a warning about a possible coding problem. Inserting such a comment about fall-thru is a long standing convention, and the compiler has codified the practice.[23] For example:

switch (command) {
    case CMD_SHOW_HELP_AND_EXIT:
      do_show_help();
      /* Fall thru */
    case CMD_EXIT:
      do_exit();
      break;
  }

Relieve stress

[edit]

To relieve stress or attempt humor, sometimes programmers add comments about the quality of the code, tools, competitors, employers, working conditions, or other arguably unprofessional topics – sometimes using profanity.[24][25]

Normative views

[edit]

There are various normative views and long-standing opinions regarding the proper use of comments in source code.[26][27] Some of these are informal and based on personal preference, while others are published or promulgated as formal guidelines for a particular community.[28]

Need for comments

[edit]

Experts have varying viewpoints on whether, and when, comments are appropriate in source code.[9][29] Some assert that source code should be written with few comments, on the basis that the source code should be self-explanatory or self-documenting.[9] Others suggest code should be extensively commented (it is not uncommon for over 50% of the non-whitespace characters in source code to be contained within comments).[30][31]

In between these views is the assertion that comments are neither beneficial nor harmful by themselves, and what matters is that they are correct and kept in sync with the source code, and omitted if they are superfluous, excessive, difficult to maintain or otherwise unhelpful.[32][33]

Comments are sometimes used to document contracts in the design by contract approach to programming.

Level of detail

[edit]

Depending on the intended audience of the code and other considerations, the level of detail and description may vary considerably.

For example, the following Java comment would be suitable in an introductory text designed to teach beginning programming:

String s = "Wikipedia"; /* Assigns the value "Wikipedia" to the variable s. */

This level of detail, however, would not be appropriate in the context of production code, or other situations involving experienced developers. Such rudimentary descriptions are inconsistent with the guideline: "Good comments ... clarify intent."[10] Further, for professional coding environments, the level of detail is ordinarily well defined to meet a specific performance requirement defined by business operations.[31]

Styles

[edit]

As free-form text, comments can be styled in a wide variety of ways. Many prefer a style that is consistent, non-obstructive, easy to modify, and difficult to break. As some claim that a level of consistency is valuable and worthwhile, a consistent commenting style is sometimes agreed upon before a project starts or emerges as development progresses.[34]

The following C fragments show some of diversity in block comment style:

/*
     This is the comment body.
*/
/*****************************
 *                           *
 * This is the comment body. *
 *                           *
 *****************************/

Factors such as personal preference, flexibility of programming tools can influence the commenting style used. For example, the first might be preferred by programmers who use a source code editor that does not automatically format a comment as shown in the second example.

Software consultant and technology commentator Allen Holub[35] advocates aligning the left edges of comments:[36]

 /* This is the style recommended by Holub for C and C++.
  * It is demonstrated in ''Enough Rope'', in rule 29.
  */
 /* This is another way to do it, also in C.
 ** It is easier to do in editors that do not automatically indent the second
 ** through last lines of the comment one space from the first.
 ** It is also used in Holub's book, in rule 31.
 */

In many languages, a line comment can follow program code such that the comment is inline and generally describes the code to the left of it. For example, in this Perl:

print $s . "\n";     # Add a newline character after printing

If a language supports both line and block comments, programming teams may decide upon a convention of when to use which. For example, line comments only for minor comments, and block comments to for higher-level abstractions.

Tag

[edit]

Some comments are categorized with a prefix – a tag, codetag[37][38] or token[39]. Some editors highlight a comment based on its tag.

Commonly used tags include:

  • BUG, DEBUG — identifies a known bug; maybe implying it should be fixed
  • FIXME — implies that there is work to do to fix a bug
  • HACK, BODGE, KLUDGE — marks a solution that might be considered low quality
  • TODO — describes some work to do
  • NOTE — relatively general information
  • UNDONE — a reversal or "roll back" of previous code

For example:

int foo() {
    // TODO implement
}

Syntax examples

[edit]

Syntax for comments varies by programming language. There are common patterns used by multiple languages while also a wide range of syntax among the languages in general. To limit the length of this section, some examples are grouped by languages with the same or very similar syntax. Others are for particular languages that have less common syntax.

Curly brace languages

[edit]

Many of the curly brace languages such as C, C++ and their many derivatives delimit a line comment with // and a block comment with /* and */. Originally, C lacked the line comment, but it was added in C99. Notable languages include: C, C++, C#, D, Java, JavaScript and Swift. For example:

/*
 * Check if over maximum process limit, but be sure to exclude root.
 * This is needed to make it possible for login to set per-user
 * process limit to something lower than processes root is running.
 */
bool isOverMaximumProcessLimit() {
     // TODO implement
}

Some languages, including D and Swift, allow blocks to be nested while other do not, including C and C++.

An example of nested blocks in D:

// line comment
/* 
    block comment
*/
/+ start of outer block
  /+ inner block +/
    end of outer block +/

An example of nested blocks in Swift:

/* This is the start of the outer comment.
    /* This is the nested comment. */
This is the end of the outer comment. */

Scripting

[edit]

A pattern in many scripting languages is to delimit a line comment with #. Support for a block comment varies. Notable languages include: Bash, Raku, Ruby, Perl, PowerShell, Python and R.

An example in R:

# This is a comment
print("This is not a comment")  # This is another comment

Block in Ruby

[edit]

A block comment is delimited by =begin and =end that start a line. For example:

puts "not a comment"
# this is a comment
puts "not a comment"
=begin
whatever goes in these lines
is just for the human reader
=end
puts "not a comment"

Block in Perl

[edit]

Instead of a regular block commenting construct, Perl uses literate programming plain old documentation (POD) markup.[40] For example:[41]

=item Pod::List-E<gt>new()
Create a new list object. Properties may be specified through a hash
reference like this:
  my $list = Pod::List->new({ -start => $., -indent => 4 });
=cut
sub new {
    ...
}

Raku (previously called Perl 6) uses the same line comments and POD comments as Perl, but adds a configurable block comment type: "multi-line / embedded comments".[42] It starts with #` and then an opening bracket character and ends with the matching closing bracket character.[42] For example:

#`{{ "commenting out" this version 
toggle-case(Str:D $s)
Toggles the case of each character in a string:
  my Str $toggled-string = toggle-case("mY NAME IS mICHAEL!");
}}
sub toggle-case(Str:D $s) #`( this version of parens is used now ){
    ...
}

Block in PowerShell

[edit]

PowerShell supports a block comment delimited by <# and #>. For example:

# Single line comment
<# Multi
   Line
   Comment #>

Block in Python

[edit]

Although Python does not provide for block comments[43] a bare string literal represented by a triple-quoted string is often used for this purpose.[44][43] In the examples below, the triple double-quoted strings act like comments, but are also treated as docstrings:

"""
At the top of a file, this is the module docstring
"""

class MyClass:
    """Class docstring"""

    def my_method(self):
        """Method docstring"""

Browser markup

[edit]

Markup languages in general vary in comment syntax, but some of the notable internet markup formats such as HTML and XML delimit a block comment with <!-- and --> and provide no line comment support. An example in XML:

<!-- select the context here -->
<param name="context" value="public" />

For compatibility with SGML, double-hyphen (--) is not allowed inside comments.

ColdFusion provides syntax similar to the HTML comment, but uses three dashes instead of two. CodeFusion allows for nested block comments.

Block in Haskell

[edit]

In Haskell, a block comment is delimited by {- and -}. For example:

{- this is a comment
on more lines -}
-- and this is a comment on one line
putStrLn "Wikipedia"  -- this is another comment

Haskell also provides a literate programming method of commenting known as "Bird Style".[45] Lines starting with > are interpreted as code and everything else is considered a comment. One additional requirement is a blank line before and after the code block:

In Bird-style you have to leave a blank before the code.

> fact :: Integer -> Integer
> fact 0 = 1
> fact (n+1) = (n+1) * fact n

And you have to leave a blank line after the code as well.

Literate programming can also be accomplished via LaTeX. Example of a definition:

\usepackage{verbatim}
\newenvironment{code}{\verbatim}{\endverbatim}

Used as follows:

% the LaTeX source file
The \verb|fact n| function call computes $n!$ if $n\ge 0$, here is a definition:\\
\begin{code}
fact :: Integer -> Integer
fact 0 = 1
fact (n+1) = (n+1) * fact n
\end{code}
Here more explanation using \LaTeX{} markup

Block in Lua

[edit]

Lua supports block comments delimited by --[[ and ]][46] For example:

--[[A multi-line
long comment
]]

Block in SQL

[edit]

In some variants of SQL, the curly brace language block comment (/**/) is supported. Variants include: Transact-SQL, MySQL, SQLite, PostgreSQL, and Oracle.[47][48][49][50][51]

MySQL also supports a line comment delimited by #.

Less common syntax

[edit]

APL

[edit]

APL uses ("lamp") for a line comment. For example:

⍝ Now add the numbers:
ca+b ⍝ addition

In dialects that have the ("left") and ("right") primitives, comments can often be inside or separate statements, in the form of ignored strings:

d2×c 'where' ca+ 'bound' b

AppleScript

[edit]

AppleScript supports both line and block comments. For example:

# line comment (in later versions)
(*
This program displays a greeting.
*)
on greet(myGreeting)
     display dialog myGreeting & " world!"
end greet

-- Show the greeting
greet("Hello")

BASIC

[edit]

Early versions of BASIC used REM (short for remark) for a line comment.

10 REM This BASIC program shows the use of the PRINT and GOTO Statements.
15 REM It fills the screen with the phrase "HELLO"
20 PRINT "HELLO"
30 GOTO 20

In later variations, including Quick Basic, Q Basic, Visual Basic (VB), VB.NET, VBScript, FreeBASIC and Gambas, a line comment is delimited with ' (apostrophe). An example in VB.NET:

Public Class Form1
    Private Sub Button1_Click(sender As Object, e As EventArgs) Handles Button1.Click
        ' new style line comment
        rem old style line comment still supported
        MessageBox.Show("Hello, World") ' show dialog with a greeting
    End Sub
End Class

Cisco IOS and IOS-XE configuration

[edit]

The exclamation point (!) may be used to mark comments in a Cisco router's configuration mode, however such comments are not saved to non-volatile memory (which contains the startup-config), nor are they displayed by the "show run" command.[52][53]

It is possible to insert human-readable content that is actually part of the configuration, and may be saved to the NVRAM startup-config via:

  • The "description" command, used to add a description to the configuration of an interface or of a BGP neighbor
  • The "name" parameter, to add a remark to a static route
  • The "remark" command in access lists
! Paste the text below to reroute traffic manually
config t
int gi0/2
no shut
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 gi0/2 name ISP2
no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 gi0/1 name ISP1
int gi0/1
shut
exit

Fortran

[edit]

The following fixed-form Fortran code fragment shows that comment syntax is column-oriented. A letter C in the first column causes the entire line to be treated as a comment. In Fortran 77, an asterisk in column 1 also indicates a comment.

C
C Lines beginning with 'C' in the first (a.k.a. comment) column are comments
C
      WRITE (6,610)
  610 FORMAT(12H HELLO WORLD)
      END

The following Fortran 90 code fragment shows a more modern line comment syntax; text following !.

! A comment
program comment_test
    print '(A)', 'Hello world' ! also a comment
end program

Free-form Fortran, also introduced with Fortran 90, only supports this latter style of comment.

Although not a part of the Fortran Standard, many Fortran compilers offer an optional C-like preprocessor pass. This can be used to provide block comments:

#if 0
  This is a block comment spanning
  multiple lines.
#endif
program comment_test
    print '(A)', 'Hello world' ! also a comment
end program

MATLAB

[edit]

In MATLAB's programming language, the '%' character indicates a single-line comment. Multi line comments are also available via %{ and %} brackets and can be nested, e.g.

% These are the derivatives for each term
d = [0 -1 0];

%{
  %{
    (Example of a nested comment, indentation is for cosmetics (and ignored).)
  %}
  We form the sequence, following the Taylor formula.
  Note that we're operating on a vector.
%}
seq = d .* (x - c).^n ./(factorial(n))

% We add-up to get the Taylor approximation
approx = sum(seq)

Nim

[edit]

Nim delimits a line comment with # and block comments with #[ and ]#. Block comments can be nested.

Nim also has documentation comments that use mixed Markdown and ReStructuredText markups. A line documentation comment uses '##' and a block documentation comment uses '##[' and ']##'. The compiler can generate HTML, LaTeX and JSON documentation from the documentation comments. Documentation comments are part of the abstract syntax tree and can be extracted using macros.[54]

## Documentation of the module *ReSTructuredText* and **MarkDown**
# This is a comment, but it is not a documentation comment.

type Kitten = object  ## Documentation of type
  age: int  ## Documentation of field

proc purr(self: Kitten) =
  ## Documentation of function
  echo "Purr Purr"  # This is a comment, but it is not a documentation comment.

# This is a comment, but it is not a documentation comment.

OCaml

[edit]

OCaml supports nestable comments. For example:

codeLine(* comment level 1(*comment level 2*)*)

Pascal, Delphi

[edit]

In Pascal and Delphi, a block comment is delimited by { and }, and as an alternative for computers that do not support these characters, (* and *) are also supported. A line comment is delimited by \\.[55] In Niklaus Wirth's more modern family of languages (including Modula-2 and Oberon), comments are delimited by (* and *).[56][57] Comments can be nested. For example:

(* test diagonals *)
columnDifference := testColumn - column;
if (row + columnDifference = testRow) or
    .......

PHP

[edit]

Comments in PHP can be either curly brace style (both line and block), or line delimited with #l. Blocks cannot be nested. Starting in PHP 8, a # only means comment if it's not immediately followed by [. Otherwise, it delimits an attribute, which continues till the next ]. For example:

/**
 * This class contains a sample documentation.
 * @author Unknown
 */
#[Attribute]
class MyAttribute {
    const VALUE = 'value';
    // C++ style line comment
    private $value;
    # script style line comment
    public function __construct($value = null) {
        $this->value = $value;
    }
}

Double dash

[edit]

A relatively loose collection of languages use -- for a single line comment. Notable languages include: Ada, Eiffel, Haskell, Lua, SQL and VHDL. Block comment support varies. An example in Ada:

-- the air traffic controller task takes requests for takeoff and landing
task type Controller (My_Runway: Runway_Access) is
   -- task entries for synchronous message passing
   entry Request_Takeoff (ID: in Airplane_ID; Takeoff: out Runway_Access);
   entry Request_Approach(ID: in Airplane_ID; Approach: out Runway_Access);
end Controller;

Security issues

[edit]

In interpreted languages the comments are viewable to the end user of the program. In some cases, such as sections of code that are "commented out", this may present a security vulnerability.[58]

See also

[edit]

Notes and references

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
In computer programming, a comment is a human-readable annotation embedded within source code that is deliberately ignored by compilers or interpreters during execution, serving to explain the purpose, logic, or functionality of the code to developers. These annotations are essential components of well-structured programs, as they facilitate collaboration, debugging, and long-term maintenance without altering the program's behavior. Comments play a critical role in enhancing code readability and documentation, allowing programmers to clarify complex algorithms, note assumptions, or describe intended outcomes for themselves or team members revisiting the code later. By providing context that the code alone may not convey—such as the rationale behind a specific implementation or references to external dependencies—they reduce errors during updates and make software more accessible to new contributors. Effective commenting is considered a best practice in professional development, often required in educational settings and industry standards to ensure code quality and compliance. Programming languages typically support two main types of comments: single-line and multi-line (or block) comments, each delimited by specific syntactic markers to signal their non-executable nature. Single-line comments apply to one line of text and are commonly initiated by symbols such as // in languages like C++, , and , or # in Python and shell scripts, with the comment extending from the marker to the end of the line. Multi-line comments, on the other hand, enclose text between opening and closing delimiters, such as /* and */ in C-derived languages, allowing annotations to span multiple lines without repeated markers. Some languages, like , use keywords such as REM for remarks, while others like MATLAB employ % for single lines and %{ %} for blocks. These conventions vary across languages but universally prioritize ignoring the content to preserve program semantics. Beyond basic syntax, comments are strategically placed in code structures—such as file headers for overall program descriptions, function headers for input/output details, and inline notes for intricate logic—to maximize their utility without cluttering the source. Best practices emphasize concise, meaningful descriptions over redundant or implementation-focused remarks, avoiding phrases that merely restate obvious while focusing on high-level intent and edge cases. In collaborative environments, standardized commenting styles, including author attributions and modification histories, further promote and .

Fundamentals

Definition

In , a comment is non-executable text embedded within files to explain, annotate, or temporarily disable sections of without influencing program execution or runtime behavior. These annotations allow developers to include descriptive notes directly alongside the code, facilitating comprehension and . Comments originated in early high-level programming languages like during the , where they were introduced to improve human readability amid increasingly complex logic that raw code instructions alone could not adequately convey. In 's initial implementation, comments were denoted by a 'C' in the first column of a line, marking the entire line as non-executable and preserving it in the source for programmer reference. A defining characteristic of comments is their complete disregard by compilers and interpreters, which parse and exclude them during the translation to , ensuring no overhead in the final . Depending on the language, comments may take forms such as single-line (terminated by a ), multi-line (delimited by matching symbols), or nested structures, though specifics vary across implementations. Comments differ fundamentally from string literals, which represent runtime data—such as text values processed and stored by the program—whereas comments serve exclusively as developer-oriented metadata, removed entirely before execution and never incorporated into the program's operational logic. This separation ensures comments enhance maintainability without becoming part of the executable's data or functionality.

Attributes

Comments in computer programming are defined by specific parsing rules that dictate how they are recognized and processed by compilers or interpreters. Typically, comments are delimited by , such as the single-line delimiter // followed by text until the end of the line, or block delimiters like /* to start and */ to end a multi-line comment. In C++, for instance, the lexer identifies these during the third phase of translation, where comments are replaced by a single space character to separate without altering the program's semantics. Similarly, Python uses the # token to initiate a comment that extends to the end of the physical line, unless implicit line joining rules (such as those within parentheses) are in effect. The scope and visibility of comments distinguish between intra-line comments, which appear after code on the same line and are terminated by the line end, and full-line comments, which occupy entire lines dedicated solely to . While comments are preserved in the source code for human readability and maintenance, they are systematically removed or ignored during compilation or interpretation to avoid inclusion in the output. In C++, this removal occurs early in the process, ensuring comments do not influence runtime behavior or binary size. Python's parser likewise discards comments entirely, treating them as non-tokens that do not participate in syntax analysis. Nesting behavior varies across languages to manage parsing complexity and ambiguity. In C++, traditional block comments (/* */) do not support nesting; an inner /* is treated as literal text within the outer comment, and the first */ closes the block, potentially leading to unexpected truncation if nested structures are attempted. Python prohibits nesting altogether, as its line-based comments (#) inherently cannot contain sub-comments without line breaks, which would terminate the parent. Conversely, the D programming language introduces dedicated nesting block comments delimited by /+ and +/, which explicitly allow recursive embedding, such as /+ outer /+ inner +/ more outer +/, to facilitate commenting out sections of code that may already include comments. This design prevents parsing errors in nested scenarios while maintaining clear termination. Many modern programming languages support encoding in comments to accommodate non-ASCII characters and . This enables developers to include text in various scripts, such as Chinese or , within annotations without encoding conflicts. The Unicode Technical Standard #55 provides guidelines for handling such cases, addressing issues like rendering in comments (e.g., right-to-left scripts) and ensuring consistent newline processing across tools, as seen in languages like and Ada 2012. For example, Python has supported explicit source file encodings including since version 2.0 in 2000, allowing Unicode in comments via encoding declarations. and later standards further this by permitting universal character names and source files, extending to comment content.

Purposes

Explaining Code Intent

Comments play a crucial role in describing the intent of code by articulating the rationale behind design choices and implementation decisions, rather than merely restating the mechanics of the code itself. For instance, a comment might explain that a particular was selected to handle rare edge cases in , helping developers understand the "why" behind the code without needing to reverse-engineer it. This focus on intent is essential for long-term , as it bridges the gap between the code's surface-level operations and the underlying objectives. In collaborative environments, intent-focused comments reduce by providing context that accelerates and joint development efforts. Developers in s often spend substantial time deciphering each other's ; well-placed intent comments mitigate this by clarifying purpose, leading to faster issue resolution and fewer misunderstandings during reviews or handoffs. An empirical study on comment generation expectations found that practitioners value comments for facilitating , noting they help members quickly grasp non-obvious decisions and integrate changes more efficiently. Additionally, on program comprehension confirms that descriptive comments preceding key blocks improve task completion times in multi-developer settings for maintenance activities. Effective intent comments typically appear as high-level overviews before functions or complex sections, emphasizing strategic reasoning over tactical details. Consider this Python example:

python

# Validate user input to prevent injection attacks while allowing flexible formatting; # chosen regex balances security with usability for international phone numbers def validate_phone(phone): pattern = r'^\+?[\d\s\-\(\)]{10,15}$' return bool(re.match(pattern, phone))

# Validate user input to prevent injection attacks while allowing flexible formatting; # chosen regex balances security with usability for international phone numbers def validate_phone(phone): pattern = r'^\+?[\d\s\-\(\)]{10,15}$' return bool(re.match(pattern, phone))

Here, the comment conveys the intent—security with usability—without duplicating the regex logic, aiding future modifiers in preserving the balance. Similarly, in , a method header comment might state: "// Computes optimal route using to minimize fuel consumption in EV fleets; ignores traffic for real-time performance." Such comments promote deeper understanding without . Studies on comment utility, including those evaluating summary comments, show they particularly benefit comprehension of unfamiliar codebases in team contexts. A common pitfall is over-commenting obvious code, which introduces noise and dilutes the value of meaningful explanations, potentially overwhelming readers and increasing overhead. For example, adding "// Add 1 to i" next to i += 1 provides no and can make scanning for true harder. on code comment quality highlights that excessive or redundant comments lead to inconsistencies over time, as they are less likely to be updated, ultimately hindering rather than helping comprehension. To avoid this, developers should reserve comments for non-evident rationale, ensuring they remain concise and focused on purpose.

Documenting Algorithms

In , documenting algorithms through comments involves embedding explanatory notes directly within the to elucidate the logical flow and computational steps of non-trivial procedures. This practice enhances readability and , particularly for intricate computations where the sequence of operations may not be immediately apparent from the alone. Inline comments, placed adjacent to specific lines or blocks, are a primary technique for breaking down algorithmic steps, allowing developers to trace the progression of data transformations and decision points. For instance, in a implementation, an inline comment might read: "// Select pivot as middle element to balance partition," highlighting the choice's rationale without altering the executable . A key method for algorithm explanation is the integration of within comments, which serves as a high-level outline before delving into language-specific syntax. This approach, known as the Pseudocode Programming Process, begins with writing detailed descriptions in comments to clarify the 's structure, then refines them into actual code while retaining the comments for ongoing reference. As advocated in Steve McConnell's , this technique bridges the gap between initial design and implementation, reducing errors in complex routines like graph traversals or sorting mechanisms by ensuring the intent remains visible. For example:

// Pseudocode: Traverse graph using depth-first search // 1. Start at source node // 2. Mark node as visited // 3. Recur on unvisited adjacent nodes // 4. Backtrack when no adjacent nodes remain void dfs(int node) { visited[node] = true; // Mark current node as visited for (int adj : graph[node]) { if (!visited[adj]) { dfs(adj); // Recur on adjacent unvisited node } } // Backtrack implicitly via recursion return }

// Pseudocode: Traverse graph using depth-first search // 1. Start at source node // 2. Mark node as visited // 3. Recur on unvisited adjacent nodes // 4. Backtrack when no adjacent nodes remain void dfs(int node) { visited[node] = true; // Mark current node as visited for (int adj : graph[node]) { if (!visited[adj]) { dfs(adj); // Recur on adjacent unvisited node } } // Backtrack implicitly via recursion return }

This pseudocode-comment hybrid not only documents the steps but also facilitates and . Comments also enable the annotation of algorithmic complexity, providing concise notations of time and space requirements to inform performance expectations without requiring separate analysis documents. Developers often insert big-O notations directly in comments to denote dominant factors, such as "// Merge step achieves O(n time for sorted halves, yielding overall O(n log n)." This practice is particularly valuable in performance-critical domains like , where understanding aids optimization decisions. In educational and analytical contexts, such annotations appear in complexity analyses, as seen in structured rules for evaluating statement costs within loops. The use of comments for documenting algorithms traces back to the early days of scientific computing in the and , when high-level languages like were developed for numerical simulations and engineering calculations. I, released in 1957, introduced comment lines beginning with 'C' in column 1, allowing programmers to annotate complex mathematical routines in simulations for physics and aerodynamics on machines like the 704. This feature was essential for early scientific codes, where algorithms involved iterative solvers and matrix operations, enabling teams to maintain clarity amid the era's limited debugging tools. , leader of the project, noted that such documentation supported the language's goal of making programming accessible for scientific problem-solving.

Generating Documentation

Structured comments in programming languages facilitate the use of automated tools to generate external from inline annotations, transforming code remarks into formatted outputs such as pages, PDF files, or references. These tools parse specific markup within comments to extract details like function parameters, return values, and descriptions, enabling developers to maintain a single source of truth for both code and its . This approach ensures that evolves alongside the , minimizing discrepancies that arise from separate manual updates. One seminal tool is , introduced by in 1996 as part of the initial (JDK 1.0) release. Javadoc processes specially formatted block comments, typically enclosed in /** ... */, to produce HTML-based API documentation. It supports tags such as @param for describing method parameters and @return for specifying output types and behaviors, allowing for structured extraction of metadata directly from source files. This format has become a standard for Java projects, generating navigable pages that include class hierarchies, method signatures, and cross-references. Similarly, , developed by Dimitri van Heesch starting in 1997, extends this concept to multiple languages including C++, , and Python. Initially focused on C++ documentation, it quickly evolved to support cross-language projects by parsing block or line comments with commands like \param and \return. Doxygen outputs versatile formats such as , for PDF generation, or even RTF, making it suitable for diverse codebases. Its multi-language capability allows unified documentation across mixed-language repositories, a key advantage in large-scale . The primary benefits of these tools lie in their ability to produce versioned that remains synchronized with changes, reducing manual maintenance efforts in expansive projects like enterprise or open-source libraries. For instance, when is refactored, regenerating from comments ensures accuracy without redundant editing, which can otherwise lead to outdated or inconsistent . This automation enhances developer productivity by streamlining onboarding for new team members and facilitating API usage through searchable, up-to-date references. In large projects, such as those involving thousands of modules, this synchronization prevents documentation debt, where manual docs lag behind rapid iterations. Over the 2010s, integration with integrated development environments (IDEs) advanced this process further, with tools like (VS Code) introducing extensions for real-time documentation preview. Extensions such as Doxygen Documentation Generator and Javadoc Tools, available since the mid-2010s following 's 2015 launch, enable on-the-fly comment insertion and live previews of generated docs within the editor. Developers can hover over functions to view rendered parameter descriptions or generate full previews instantly, accelerating the documentation workflow without leaving the IDE. This evolution supports iterative development by providing immediate feedback on comment structure and output quality.

Other Practical Uses

One common practical use of comments is to temporarily disable sections of code during debugging or testing, a technique known as "commenting out." This allows developers to isolate problematic areas without deleting the code, facilitating iterative experimentation; for instance, in , comments should begin at the leftmost column when disabling code to ensure proper parsing, and obsolete sections should be removed once resolved. In Java open-source systems, such disabled code comments form a distinct category, often used to preserve potentially reusable logic while troubleshooting. Comments also serve as repositories for metadata, embedding essential non-executable information like version numbers, attributions, or declarations directly within the source file. For example, a block comment might include /* Copyright 2025 xAI Corporation */ to assert ownership and compliance. In analyzed projects, metadata comments explicitly capture ship via tags like @[author](/page/Author) and versioning via @version or @since, aiding without relying on external tools. This practice integrates briefly with documentation generators by providing structured tags, though it remains valuable standalone for quick reference. Beyond core metadata, comments document development processes by specific changes, such as fixes or updates, which complements systems by offering inline context. An entry like // Fixed [bug](/page/Bug!) #123 on 2025-11-09: Adjusted buffer allocation to prevent overflow records the rationale at the site of modification, helping future maintainers understand evolution without diffing commits. Studies of repositories classify these as "log" comments, which track alterations and integrate with broader change histories to enhance comprehension. Unusual applications of comments include injecting humor to alleviate developer stress during long sessions, fostering engagement without impacting functionality. Responsible humorous remarks in comments or documentation can boost cognitive relief and team morale, as evidenced in engineering contexts where they support addressing complex challenges. Additionally, comments extend effective syntax through preprocessor directives, which resemble comments but direct compilation; for example, #pragma statements in C++ provide hints like optimization flags, blending comment-like notation with build-time instructions. Comments further act as visualization aids, incorporating to sketch UML-like diagrams or data structures in , enhancing readability in monospaced editors. Developers embed these within code margins to illustrate flows without external tools; a simple box diagram might appear as:

// +----------------+ // | Input Data | // +----------------+ // | // v // +----------------+ // | Process Here | // +----------------+

// +----------------+ // | Input Data | // +----------------+ // | // v // +----------------+ // | Process Here | // +----------------+

Such ASCII diagrams approximate graphical ideas directly in source files, promoting intuitive understanding of architectures in programmer workflows.

Best Practices

Rationale for Comments

Comments serve a critical role in by preserving the original intent of code as it evolves over time, particularly when modifications by different developers can obscure underlying design decisions. In their seminal work, Kernighan and Plauger argue that well-placed comments enhance and clarify complex logic, ensuring that the purpose of segments remains evident despite changes. This preservation is essential because code alone often documents implementation details ("how") but fails to convey rationale or assumptions ("why"), which can lead to misinterpretations during maintenance. Empirical studies underscore the benefits of comments in reducing challenges, with indicating that high- comments aid developers in software comprehension, detection, and overall program upkeep. For instance, systematic reviews of comment over the past decade highlight how effective annotations correlate with fewer errors in legacy systems and domain-specific contexts where code alone may not suffice. Although advocates of emphasize descriptive naming and structure to minimize the need for annotations, experts counter that comments remain indispensable for explaining non-obvious decisions, providing historical context, and addressing variability in programmer expertise. Self-documenting practices are ideal for routine logic, but in cases involving intricate algorithms, legacy integrations, or specialized domains, comments bridge gaps that code clarity cannot, preventing costly misunderstandings.

Optimal Detail Levels

Effective commenting practices emphasize targeting non-obvious or complex code segments while refraining from annotating straightforward operations, thereby maintaining without . For instance, simple increments like i++ require no explanation, as the code's intent is self-evident, but intricate algorithms or decisions warrant clarification to aid comprehension. Comment detail can be categorized into high-level and low-level tiers to match the needed. High-level comments provide overviews of functions or modules, outlining purpose and high-level flow without delving into specifics, such as explaining decisions for third-party integrations. Low-level comments are reserved for exceptional cases, like temporary hacks or low-level optimizations, where brevity is essential to avoid cluttering the ; they may clarify variable assumptions or return value details. The appropriate level of detail is influenced by factors including the and project scale. For developers or cross-team collaborations, more explanatory comments reduce the by assuming less prior knowledge, whereas expert audiences in mature projects benefit from concise annotations focused on rationale. Larger-scale projects often exhibit lower comment densities due to established conventions, while smaller or educational efforts may require denser . Additionally, agile methodologies prominent in the 2010s prioritize minimal viable comments, favoring through descriptive naming and structure to support rapid iterations and reduce maintenance overhead. Tools for assessing comment effectiveness often rely on density ratios, defined as the proportion of comment lines to total lines of . Empirical studies of open-source projects indicate average densities around 19%, with scripting languages showing optimal ranges of 20-30% to balance and conciseness, as observed in analyses from the late . These metrics, while not prescriptive, help gauge , with densities below 10% signaling potential under-documentation in complex codebases. With the rise of AI tools as of 2025, developers increasingly use generative AI to assist in creating comments, particularly for boilerplate or initial drafts. Best practices recommend human review of AI-generated comments to ensure they focus on the "why" of code decisions rather than redundant "what" descriptions, maintaining accuracy and relevance in evolving codebases.

Syntax Variations

Block Comments

Block comments, also known as multi-line comments, consist of text enclosed between a starting and an ending , allowing programmers to annotate or temporarily disable sections of code spanning multiple lines without affecting execution. These comments are ignored by the or interpreter during , treating the entire enclosed content as whitespace. A common example is the syntax in , where block comments begin with /* and end with */. This syntax originated with the introduction of comment statements in ALGOL 60 in 1960, where comments could be structured as comment followed by text until a semicolon or as a block using begin comment ... end, enabling multi-line annotations that ignore internal delimiters except for termination markers. The approach was later refined in languages like PL/I (1964), which adopted the /* ... */ delimiters still prevalent today, influencing subsequent languages such as C. Block comments offer several advantages over single-line alternatives, particularly for enclosing larger code sections such as function headers, copyright licenses, or temporary debugging blocks, as they allow consistent indentation and formatting to be preserved within the comment for readability. They also facilitate quick disabling of code segments during development without modifying each line individually, which is useful for testing or maintenance. In terms of , the or interpreter scans for the closing and discards all intervening content, regardless of its structure, including nested delimiters in non-nesting variants, which simplifies but can lead to errors if comments are unbalanced. This rule ensures efficient processing, as internal text is not tokenized or interpreted. Variations exist across languages regarding nesting support; for instance, Python lacks native block comments but commonly uses triple-quoted strings (''' ... ''' or """ ... """) for multi-line text that functions similarly to comments when not assigned, though these are non-nestable and treated as strings rather than ignored text. In contrast, supports nestable block comments using #[ ... ]#, allowing comments within comments without premature termination, which enhances flexibility for complex documentation.

Line Comments

Line comments, also referred to as single-line comments, are annotations in programming languages that begin with a designated token and extend to the end of the current line, with all subsequent text on that line ignored by the compiler or interpreter until the character. No closing delimiter is required, distinguishing them from block comments that enclose text between opening and closing markers. Common delimiters include // in languages such as C++, , and , and # in Python, , and . This syntax enables developers to add brief explanations directly alongside executable code, such as noting the purpose of a variable or operation on the same line. For instance, in C++, the line int count = 0; // Initialize counter for loop iterations combines declaration and annotation seamlessly. In Python, # Calculate total sales can follow an assignment like total = sum(sales) # Calculate total sales. The // delimiter was popularized in BCPL, a systems programming language developed by Martin Richards in 1967 at the University of Cambridge, where comments from // (or variants like || and \\) extended to the end of the line. BCPL's design influenced subsequent languages, including B and C, though early C omitted // in favor of block comments until C99 standardized it; C++ adopted it from the outset in 1985, promoting widespread use in object-oriented and modern imperative languages. This historical adoption facilitated mixing comments with code on the same line, enhancing readability without dedicated comment blocks. Advantages of line comments include their simplicity for short, inline notes, allowing rapid of specific elements without altering program flow. They support chaining for pseudo-multi-line comments by repeating the at the start of each subsequent line, as in:

// This is a multi-line // comment using line comments // in C++ or [Java](/page/Java).

// This is a multi-line // comment using line comments // in C++ or [Java](/page/Java).

This approach is particularly useful for temporary or contextual remarks during development. However, line comments have limitations, as they are confined to a single line and thus unsuitable for extended or , requiring repetitive delimiters for longer texts which can clutter the source. In whitespace-sensitive languages like Python, line comments must respect indentation conventions to preserve block structure visually and avoid parser confusion, with each comment line starting with # followed by a space if part of a block.

Language-Specific Syntax

In programming languages, comments often incorporate special tags or markers to enable advanced features like automated documentation generation or developer workflow integration. For example, Java's Javadoc system uses structured tags within documentation comments (delimited by /** ... */) to extract metadata for API reference materials; the @author tag specifies the creator of a class, method, or package, while @param describes method parameters including their names and purposes. These tags must appear at the start of lines within the comment block and can be combined with inline elements like {@link} for cross-references, allowing tools to produce output with sections for authors, parameters, return values, and exceptions. Similarly, tags such as TODO and FIXME serve as universal markers for issue tracking across languages like , Python, and C++, where they flag incomplete features or bugs; integrated development environments (IDEs) like recognize these patterns in both line and block comments, indexing them for display in dedicated tool windows to prioritize maintenance tasks. Certain languages feature unique comment delimiters that deviate from common C-style conventions. In , single-line comments begin with -- (two or more dashes) and continue until the , while nested block comments use {- ... -} and support arbitrary nesting for complex annotations or pragmas without interrupting the structure. The SQL standard similarly employs -- for single-line comments ending at the , alongside /* ... */ for multi-line blocks, enabling annotations in queries without altering execution; this syntax is implemented consistently in systems to document definitions or query logic. In , which lacks native multi-line comments beyond single-line #, here-documents (<<END ... END) function as pseudo-comments by creating unused multi-line strings that preserve formatting and can embed explanatory text, serving as a workaround for documenting extended code sections. Hybrid comment syntax appears in languages blending multiple styles for flexibility. PHP supports C++-style // for single-line comments, C-style /* ... / for blocks (non-nestable), and shell-style # for single lines, though # is discouraged in favor of // to avoid potential future reserved uses; this multiplicity accommodates developers from varied backgrounds while ensuring comments are ignored during parsing. In Objective-C, as used in Apple ecosystems, standard C comments (// and / ... */) coexist with preprocessor directives prefixed by #, such as #import for header inclusion or #pragma for compiler instructions, where embedded comments clarify conditional compilation or platform-specific behaviors. Modern languages introduce extensions that integrate comments with tooling for enhanced developer experience. Rust's /// syntax creates outer documentation comments attached to the following item (e.g., functions or structs), supporting Markdown formatting, code examples, and automatic testing via rustdoc, which generates browsable HTML with searchable, linked references. Complementing this, //! applies module-level documentation from within the item, promoting self-contained crates with formatted, versioned APIs that facilitate collaboration in large-scale systems.

Examples by Language

C-Style Languages

In C-style languages, such as C, C++, and Java, comments serve to annotate code without affecting compilation or execution, following syntax established in the ANSI C standard of 1989. Block comments are delimited by /* and */, allowing multi-line annotations, while single-line comments begin with // and extend to the end of the line; these are replaced by a single space during preprocessing and do not nest. This dual syntax originated in C, where only block comments were defined, with single-line comments added in later standards like and natively supported in C++ from its inception. Java extends this with Javadoc comments, using /** and */ to generate structured documentation, incorporating tags like @param for parameters and @return for outputs. For instance, a function header might read:

java

/** * Calculates the sum of two integers. * @param a the first integer * @param b the second integer * @return the sum of a and b */ public int sum(int a, int b) { return a + b; }

/** * Calculates the sum of two integers. * @param a the first integer * @param b the second integer * @return the sum of a and b */ public int sum(int a, int b) { return a + b; }

This format enables automated API documentation extraction via the Javadoc tool. In C++, idiomatic comments often explain algorithms or complex logic, such as using block comments for overviews and line comments for inline notes:

cpp

// Bubble sort implementation void bubbleSort(int arr[], int n) { /* Outer loop for passes */ for (int i = 0; i < n-1; i++) { // Inner loop for comparisons for (int j = 0; j < n-i-1; j++) { if (arr[j] > arr[j+1]) { // Swap elements std::swap(arr[j], arr[j+1]); } } } }

// Bubble sort implementation void bubbleSort(int arr[], int n) { /* Outer loop for passes */ for (int i = 0; i < n-1; i++) { // Inner loop for comparisons for (int j = 0; j < n-i-1; j++) { if (arr[j] > arr[j+1]) { // Swap elements std::swap(arr[j], arr[j+1]); } } } }

Common practices include using preprocessing directives like #if 0 ... #endif to temporarily exclude code blocks, functioning as pseudo-comments for debugging without relying on non-standard nested comment extensions. This approach avoids syntax errors from unclosed delimiters and supports conditional compilation across C-style languages.

Scripting Languages

In scripting languages, which are typically interpreted and designed for rapid development, comments emphasize simplicity and readability to support quick prototyping and maintenance. Languages like Python, , and use straightforward syntax for comments, often prioritizing single-line markers over complex delimiters to align with their concise, human-readable code philosophies. Python employs the hash symbol # for line comments, which begin after the # and extend to the end of the line, effectively treating everything following as ignored text during execution. There is no native multi-line comment syntax; instead, developers commonly prefix each line of a block with # or enclose multi-line explanations in triple-quoted strings (""" or '''), though the latter are technically string literals that can be executed if not assigned. Ruby follows a similar approach with # for inline comments but provides dedicated block comments using =begin to start and =end to terminate, allowing entire sections to be ignored without per-line prefixes. In Perl, # denotes line comments, while multi-line blocks can be achieved through repeated # or by embedding Plain Old Documentation (POD) sections delimited by =pod and =cut, which serve dual purposes as comments and extractable documentation. Idiomatic commenting in these languages often integrates directly into the . Python's docstrings, enclosed in triple quotes immediately after a module, function, class, or method definition, provide structured descriptions that become accessible via the __doc__ attribute and tools like help(). For example:

python

def [factorial](/page/Factorial)(n): """Return the factorial of n, an exact [integer](/page/Integer) >= 0. If the return value is a high precision number, it will be returned as a [Fraction](/page/Fraction) object. """ if n < 0: raise ValueError("n must be >= 0") if n == 0: return 1 else: return n * [factorial](/page/Factorial)(n-1)

def [factorial](/page/Factorial)(n): """Return the factorial of n, an exact [integer](/page/Integer) >= 0. If the return value is a high precision number, it will be returned as a [Fraction](/page/Fraction) object. """ if n < 0: raise ValueError("n must be >= 0") if n == 0: return 1 else: return n * [factorial](/page/Factorial)(n-1)

This convention was standardized by PEP 257 in 2001, which defined one-line and multi-line formats to ensure consistency for automated processing while maintaining their role as comment-like annotations. In , POD directives embedded within comments generate man pages and other formats; for instance, =head1 Description followed by text until =cut documents code sections without affecting runtime. Ruby encourages inline # comments for brevity, often placing them after statements to explain logic. Common patterns in scripting languages include inline comments within loops or conditionals to clarify iterations, such as # Check if user input is valid beside an if statement in Python, aiding debugging in dynamic environments. Block comments, like Ruby's =begin/=end, are frequently used to disable code during prototyping, allowing temporary exclusion of experimental sections without deletion. These practices highlight the emphasis on flexibility in scripting, where comments facilitate iterative development over rigid structure.

Markup and Configuration

In markup languages such as and XML, comments are denoted using the syntax <!-- comment text -->, which allows developers to insert non-executable annotations directly within the document structure without affecting rendering or parsing. This format, inherited from (SGML), has been a core feature of since its inception in the early 1990s, enabling web developers to document deprecated elements, temporary notes, or sections intended for future implementation. For instance, a common usage in browser markup might be <!-- Deprecated feature: Replace with modern API by Q2 2026 -->, which provides context for maintenance without displaying in the final output. Configuration files, often used in non-executable declarative formats, employ varied comment syntax to facilitate annotations for system administrators and non-programmers. In Windows INI files, lines beginning with a semicolon (;) or occasionally a hash (#) are treated as comments, allowing metadata or explanatory notes alongside key-value pairs. An example pattern includes # Server: example.com; Primary endpoint for API traffic, which aids in documenting server configurations without altering functionality. Similarly, in Cisco IOS configuration files, an exclamation mark (!) prefixes entire lines as comments, such as ! Updated ACL for security policy on 2025-11-01, supporting network engineers in tracking changes within router or switch setups. In database configuration and query contexts like SQL, single-line comments often use double hyphens (--), which is particularly useful for disabling sections of scripts or adding inline notes. For example, -- Temporary disable: DROP TABLE temp_data; permits selective deactivation during development or , a practice standardized in SQL implementations to enhance readability for diverse users. These comment mechanisms in markup and configuration files have been essential since the , promoting collaborative editing and long-term maintainability in and system administration environments.

Unusual Syntax

In programming languages with niche or specialized designs, comment syntax often diverges from prevalent conventions like line-ending markers or paired delimiters, reflecting historical constraints, symbolic paradigms, or unique lexical rules. These unusual forms highlight the diversity in how languages handle non-executable annotations, sometimes prioritizing integration with core syntax or over standardization. A prominent example is APL, where comments begin with the special ⍝ (Unicode U+235D, known as the "lamp" symbol) and extend to the end of the line, evoking illumination of the code's intent. This design aligns with APL's symbolic, array-centric nature, where primitives are glyphs rather than keywords, allowing seamless embedding of explanatory notes without disrupting mathematical expressions.

⍝ This computes the sum of squares (⊢/⍳10) ↑ 2 ○ ⊢/ ⍳10 ⍝ result: vector of squares up to 10

⍝ This computes the sum of squares (⊢/⍳10) ↑ 2 ○ ⊢/ ⍳10 ⍝ result: vector of squares up to 10

In legacy fixed-form , originating from the punch-card era, an entire line becomes a comment if it starts with 'C' or '*' in column 1, a holdover from early hardware limitations where the first column signaled control information to the . Modern retains this for compatibility in fixed-form source, though free-form uses '!' for line comments.

C This is a comment line in fixed-form [Fortran](/page/Fortran) PROGRAM HELLO PRINT *, 'Hello, World!' END

C This is a comment line in fixed-form [Fortran](/page/Fortran) PROGRAM HELLO PRINT *, 'Hello, World!' END

MATLAB employs '%' to initiate line comments, a simple prefix that fits its matrix-laboratory focus, where annotations often describe data manipulations or plot intentions without the overhead of block structures. Block comments use '%{ ... %}' for multi-line spans, but the single '%' remains the primary unusual marker in this domain-specific language.

% Compute matrix inverse and display A = magic(3); B = inv(A); % B should approximate identity disp(B);

% Compute matrix inverse and display A = magic(3); B = inv(A); % B should approximate identity disp(B);

OCaml's comment syntax exclusively uses '(* ... *)' for both single- and multi-line annotations, with the notable feature of nesting—allowing comments within comments without termination errors—a rarity that supports safe code experimentation in this functional language. This paired delimiter, borrowed from influences, integrates tightly with OCaml's expression-based .

(* Outer comment (* nested inner comment *) continues outer *) let x = 42 (* inline note on value *)

(* Outer comment (* nested inner comment *) continues outer *) let x = 42 (* inline note on value *)

Nim introduces a bracket-augmented form for multi-line comments with '#[ ... ]#', where additional brackets enable nesting (e.g., '#[[ ... ]]#'), combining the familiarity of '#' line comments with flexible enclosure for documentation in this systems-programming . Line comments simply use '#', but the bracketed variant stands out for its adaptability to complex code blocks.

#[ Multi-line comment spanning lines with nesting: #[[ inner ]] # ]# echo "Hello" # Line comment

#[ Multi-line comment spanning lines with nesting: #[[ inner ]] # ]# echo "Hello" # Line comment

Classic BASIC dialects use the keyword 'REM' (short for "remark") to denote comments, treating it as a statement that ignores all subsequent text on the line—a verbose, English-like approach suited to the language's beginner-friendly, line-numbered origins in the . This keyword-based syntax contrasts with symbol delimiters and persists in variants like .

10 [REM](/page/REM) This program prints a greeting 20 PRINT "Hello, World!" 30 END

10 [REM](/page/REM) This program prints a greeting 20 PRINT "Hello, World!" 30 END

(Note: Refers to QB64 documentation, a modern BASIC implementation preserving REM) Even in relatively modern scripting environments, adopts '(* ... *)' for block comments alongside '--' for lines, a choice that echoes Pascal heritage despite the language's 1993 debut, prioritizing in natural-language-style scripts for macOS.

(* Block comment for procedure description *) tell application "Finder" -- Inline line comment set homeFolder to (path to home folder) end tell

(* Block comment for procedure description *) tell application "Finder" -- Inline line comment set homeFolder to (path to home folder) end tell

These syntaxes are tailored to their languages' paradigms: APL's glyph suits its terse, symbolic computations; Fortran's columnar rule accommodates punch-card legacies; and Nim's nestable brackets enhance in versatile codebases. Such adaptations underscore how comment mechanisms evolve to support specific workflows without compromising the host language's core expressiveness.

Risks and Considerations

Security Vulnerabilities

One significant security risk associated with code comments arises from data leakage, where developers inadvertently include hardcoded sensitive information such as API keys, passwords, or tokens directly within comments. These secrets, if committed to version control repositories, become exposed to anyone with access to the , including unauthorized parties through leaks or public repositories. For instance, a comment like // API key: sk_live_12345 can persist in source files, facilitating unauthorized access to services. This issue has proliferated with the growth of open-source development in the , as evidenced by a 67% increase in hardcoded secrets detected across software supply chains in 2022 compared to , with a further 25% rise to 23.8 million new secrets on public in 2024. GitHub's secret scanning feature, introduced in 2018, automatically detects such patterns in code—including comments—and alerts repository owners to revoke compromised credentials. Another vulnerability stems from injection attacks enabled by malformed or unescaped content within comments, particularly in web applications where comments are part of dynamically generated output. In HTML, placing unescaped user input inside comment delimiters like <!-- --> allows attackers to inject payloads that close the comment early, such as --> followed by <script>alert(1)</script>, leading to (XSS) execution in the browser. Similarly, in SQL contexts, malformed comments like -- or /* */ in user-supplied data can alter query execution if not properly sanitized, enabling by commenting out intended clauses and appending malicious code. These risks highlight the need to treat comments as executable contexts when they intersect with user input parsing. Historical incidents underscore the potential impact of such vulnerabilities. The 2014 Heartbleed bug in highlighted risks of exposing implementation details in open-source code, where public —including comments—facilitated rapid analysis by security researchers, accelerating disclosure and exploitation attempts before patches were widely applied. More broadly, the inclusion of sensitive details in comments has contributed to real-world breaches by exposing application structures and hidden endpoints to attackers. To mitigate these risks, developers should employ static analysis tools that scan for sensitive patterns in comments and code. , for example, includes rules like S2068 to detect hardcoded credentials across languages, with plugins such as Sonar Secrets extending coverage to API tokens and passwords in comments. Additionally, best practices include excluding comments containing secrets from production builds via minification or stripping tools, and integrating secret scanning in pipelines to prevent commits.

Maintenance Challenges

Outdated comments pose significant maintenance challenges in , as they often fail to reflect code changes during refactoring, resulting in that misleads developers and increases the risk of introducing defects. For instance, a comment describing a function as performing an ascending sort may persist after the logic is reversed, causing and errors in subsequent modifications. from large-scale analyses of open-source repositories confirms that code-comment inconsistencies are prevalent and can contribute to bug introduction, with studies showing that code changes trigger comment updates in 13-20% of commits across projects, and up to 69% co-evolution for specific elements like variable declarations using diff-based features. Excessive comment density exacerbates these issues by contributing to , which burdens code reviews and comprehension efforts. Research on open-source projects reveals average comment densities of approximately 20% in systems, with higher ratios potentially overwhelming reviewers and correlating with reduced . Automated evaluations of comment quality further indicate that verbose or redundant comments hinder tasks, as they inflate the without providing proportional value. Version control systems introduce additional complications when merging branches with divergent comment histories, leading to conflicts that require manual resolution and delay integration. In , for example, simultaneous edits to nearby comments can trigger merge conflicts, complicating workflows in team environments. The git blame command addresses this by annotating each line—including comments—with its last modifying author and commit, enabling precise tracking of changes for conflict resolution and accountability. To alleviate these maintenance burdens, developers can integrate automated detection of outdated comments into pipelines, allowing proactive cleanup during builds. Complementing this, paradigms, introduced by Donald E. Knuth in 1984, promote weaving code and documentation into a single, narrative structure that minimizes obsolescence by treating them as interdependent artifacts.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.