I'm not convinced, yet, that eliminating LLM-generated comments is the right path for me. I do review everything written by an LLM and some comments are actually pretty good, but sometimes I'm just too tired to try to figure out how to reword an oddly worded one.
I just added Sanglard's rules to my ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md file, did another code review, and found some LLM-generated comments were really hard to understand. I think they're due to invented metaphors and flowery language instead of using standard terms, so I've added this:
- Comments must be literal. Don't invent figurative language for what a plain technical term already says — write "rows still reference it," not "rows still wear it."
Improving LLM code generation is an iterative process. I'm glad people share their efforts to improve it.
I just added Sanglard's rules to my ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md file, did another code review, and found some LLM-generated comments were really hard to understand. I think they're due to invented metaphors and flowery language instead of using standard terms, so I've added this:
- Comments must be literal. Don't invent figurative language for what a plain technical term already says — write "rows still reference it," not "rows still wear it."
Improving LLM code generation is an iterative process. I'm glad people share their efforts to improve it.