Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
This may sound like a foolish question or an observation, but i have seen that most of the times when one tries to look at the opensource code, there are no comments or just one or two lines at the start of the function telling what the function is used for e.g. register a user or data in table etc. There is no code which actually explains what exactly the function is doing etc.
Is it done intentionally (removal of comments) when a code is released to open source community to make things difficult to understand by others?
There is a line of thought that says that comments are unnecessary when the code speaks for itself. I don't believe comments would be removed on purpose, though.
I've seen both sides, and frankly code in general is insufficiently documented.
I've been congratulated and thanked for leaving copious breadcrumbs but that's because I've had to sift through too much undocumented code to want to subject anyone else to it.
Call it an ethical obligation.
My reason to document code: my short-term memory is junk. I write comments to remind myself of why I did something. Everyone else benefiting from that is gravy.
I don't think there is a practice or policy to remove comments when releasing software as Open Source. A sneaky software publisher might think that a good idea (maintaining de facto exclusivity, because nobody can't understand it, while having released an open source product) but this would cripple the Open Source project from the start and most likely render it unusable.
The code you are talking about is probably just very little documented. As ocdecio says, that can be either a good sign (the code speaks for itself and does not need comments) or a bad one (it is badly documented, bad code). Both cases are entirely possible. :)
What are you comparing it to?
I doubt that closed-source code has better comments.
As for what functions do, there is probably API documentation. No need to duplicate those in comments.
As a rule, functions should be small enough and written in a way that allows working out how it works by just reading them. A comment on top of the function describing what it does helps getting a quick overview of the function itself when reading through the whole source code file (unless the function name speaks for itself).
Many projects are organized in that way, and that is great.
However, what I am often missing when trying find my way around a larger codebase is something describing the big picture, i.e. the general architecture, principles, what goes where and similar things.
All open source is not made the same. This is what we call a generalization.
If you look at the website Ohloh, which tracks a very large amount of the open source software in existence, it paints a much different picture:
http://www.ohloh.net/languages?query=&sort=code
For instance, in the C language, there are 252+ million lines of comments, approx 1 in every 5 lines of C is a comment. For Java, nearly 1 in 3 lines is a comment. That's not bad.
Open source software has bad comments and bad documentation most of the time. There are various reasons why, some better than others. Usually they relate to laziness or the developers 'being in the moment'. None of the reasons are good reasons.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I've been holding off on releasing a library I wrote because it is the first library which I'll be releasing publicly. Here are my concerns:
The library isn't complete it is in a very usable state, I'd say it is version 0.3, however it still lacks a number of features which I would like to at some point implement, and control how they're implemented (meaning not merging someones implementation).
I'm fearful of criticism, I know there are a few things which should be reorganized/refactored, but I wrote the initial class quickly to be functional for another project I am working on.
So when is the best time to release? Should I just throw it up on github and work on the issues post-release? Or should I wait until I refactor and feel completely comfortable with what I have written?
Most classes/libraries I see are always very elegantly written, however I have not seen any in very early release stages, are a lot of classes fairly sloppy upon initial release?
Release early, release often.
Criticism is a good thing as long as its constructive. Ignore the haters, pay attention to the folks filing bug reports and commenting.
The internal structure of the code matters, but it matters more if it works for its intended purpose. In general, refactoring will change how code works internally but will not affect how it is used. Same inputs and outputs.
You need to get something half-way
useful first, and then others will say
"hey, that almost works for me", and
they'll get involved in the project.
Linus Torvalds
Linux Times (2004-10-25).
It depends on why you are doing this. If it's to provide something useful and it's useful and has benefits that no other library has, then go for it. Just list the status and what's coming next.
If you are doing this to point to on a resume, get it in good shape (the code, not necessarily feature complete). Imagine a future employer poking around the code to see what it looks like, not downloading and running the code.
Whether you release the code in an incomplete state or not, it's always worthwhile having enough documentation to allow users to understand how to use the library.... even if it's only API docs. Make sure that anything incomplete is tagged as TO DO - it helps to maintain a target list of tasks to complete, and lets users know that the feature/method/whatever hasn't been forgotten.
Providing a set of code style/standard documents (perhaps with architectural notes on class relationships) allows other developers to contribute more readily, and in a manner that enhances the library rather than making it a hotch-potch of spaghetti code. It's never easy releasing a library, then having to refactor, while maintaining backward compatibility for users who have already taken up and are using that library in a production setting.
EDIT
Don't be afraid of criticism... it goes with the territory.
Some critcism can be constructive (take heed of that).
There'll be plenty of other people who criticise your code (for whatever their reason) without being constructive, or who just denegrate your work. The difference is, you've produced the goods, they probably haven't ever contributed to any OS product/library.
Users expect you to fix their problems immediately, or to write their code for them to use your library, or simply say "it doesn't work" without any explanation of what they mean. You have to learn to live with that 24x7x365.
But just once in a while, somebody will thank you for saving them hours of work, or for providing something useful... and suddenly all the stress and hassle feels worthwhile.
I read a document by Joshua Bloch, a pricipal software engineer at Google that talked a lot about the best type of API design. Basically, once you release it, it is more or less set. He says
Public APIs are forever - one chance to get it right
You can check out the slides here. It's definitely worth reading. I have a PDF of it as well; let me know if you need it.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I've been attempting to learn programming (in C#) for a few years now. The problem I've had is that I'd know what I want to do (or what I want the program to do), but no idea on how to actually implement it. So I often wonder what it is I'm lacking. Is the mindset of a programmer somehow different, and I've yet to condition myself to that type of thinking, or do I just need to know more about syntax and what they do?
Of course, it's compounded by the fact that I have no means of taking classes at the moment.
So is trial and error the way to being a better programmer, or are there essential pieces that I presently lack?
Also, my goal is to eventually get into the Gaming Industry, and I don't know if that affects anything at this point.
By far the best way to improve your skills is to practice, practice, practice, and then practice some more. Just like an athlete gets better and hones his skills and natural abilities, the more you code the better you will get. Your best resources are going to be books and the internet--blogs, articles, websites such as SO are incredible sources of information. Google is your friend, learn how to use it effectively.
Find a problem you want to solve, and then find two or three ways to solve it. Being able to approach a problem from different angles can be an invaluable skill.
I would also recommend finding an open source project you can participate in. There are plenty of 'em out there.
Yeah, it's pretty much trial and error.
Or more accurately, research, trial, error, cry, fix, error, research, success!
Anything I want to do (that is new) I typically find by doing various searches, or I accidentally learn by participating in forums like this, and then am lucky enough to remember when it becomes neccessary.
Just dedicate yourself to research and trying "various things", and then you'll become better at it. You just need to accept that it will be difficult at first, and that that is quite acceptable and appropriate.
You'll get the hang of it. As long as you're motivated, you'll achieve what you wish.
I think the most valuable thing at this point is seeing working code in action. Get your hands on lots of working sample apps with full source that interest you. Look at the source, figure out what does what, and start to modify it!
Then try to write your own apps using similar constructs, and you'll find it much easier.
I like silky's second sentence. I agree. Just hang in there.
Find a project (small project) that you want to do, and then learn how to do it. Any project...like build a calculator or something. If you have a goal in mind, it makes it a lot easier...and it will make it easier to people to help you when you post questions so they can have a frame of reference.
Lots of google searches...and stackoverflow searches ;)
One other way that can get you started is to look at standard examples (and I'm sure you can find lots of those for C#) try and run them, understand what they do, and then start modifying them and play around.
Get your questions from such tinkering answered by reseaching the net etc.
Increase complexity and you'd be on your way in a while.
Search around for an C# Open Source project that interests you. Most projects will take any help you can give. This will allow you to practice your skills in a controlled environment.
You do have means to take courses at the moment. There are entire courses, complete with free textbooks, available online. And that's just one quick example.
I recommend you work your way through a couple of coding and design books while learning the syntax of a language or 2. Code Complete is a great place to start. As far as what you should start programming, aim for simple things that will solve a problem you have. While picking up a language I have done things like write a program that will auto-organize my media library, kick off processes based on things I tweet from my cell phone, quickly add shortcuts to my favorite launcher app, or organize and archive all of my saved school work at the end of a semester. Also, look at a LOT of other people's code. It's can be hard to code better until you've looked at better code.
With this approach you'll build your abstract skills like design and upfront preparation, practical skills like file access and network communication, and general programmer toolbox items like regular expressions and reflection.
Another interesting thing to try is Code Kata. How do you become a great musician or learn to ski or speak a foreign language? Practice. Practice. Practice.
Google for Bruce Eckel's "Thinking in ..." books, they're free and very good
Take a look at functional programming languages - This will broaden your mind and therefore change (and probably enhance) the way you look at code and problems.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I write hobby code from time to time. The thing is these tools, classes or tiny libraries of code end up in a flash stick with hopeless future! I would love to develop my projects further, and let other programmers trust them. If you were going to use something you found on the Internet, what is the most important thing you look for in that programming tool or small library? e.g. would you consider separate documentation a must?
Thanks for all contributers. I'll try my best to summarized what have been said. Feel free to modify the list. Corrections and additions are more that welcome :)
Start a blog and let others know you
are here.
Choose the most
suitable license. Possibly Open
Source licenses are the best for
hobby projects.
Put your project where people can
reach it. Consider google-code,
github, sourceforge or
other sites.
Use public version-control and
bug-tracker, So others can acquire the
latest source code of your project to
compile and use.
Write a decent documentation, beside
commenting your code clearly of
course. The documentation should
explain the purpose of the library
and provide at least simple examples.
Write tests if you are willing to provide real-world code.
If you are building a library, put a
lot of effort into designing a stable
interface.
Get a blog, release code through it. Explain why you wrote it, what problem it solves. And encourage others to improve upon it, keep the code posted as current as possible. If your tools are useful you will very quickly develop a following that 'trusts' your code.
Separate documentation isn't a must for small tools, but anything creeping into the framework world should probably have ample documentation and examples if you want any serious adoption from the community at large.
The most important thing is that the library is that it be open source, so I can read the code myself. If that is not possible then I insist on documentation.
Also consider using a project-hosting site (like google code or github).
Have a clear license with your code if you don't have one already
(preferably one which encourages modifying / improving / sharing your
code ...)
Have public version control and/or a public bug/issue tracker and/or a mailing list. There are a lot of good sites which offer these services for free.
Seperate documentation is not a deciding factor to me (if the code is well documented and the code quality is high).
Documentation explaining why you wrote it, when you started it, and it's intended function. Understanding where you're coming from will allow me to see future ideas as well as short coming you may not have seen.
Technical documentation explaining the API and some examples on how to implement it. Ideally, keep your documentation in the format that follows the language. For example C# tends to use the XML syntax for defining items. This allows me to feel at home when I'm reading it.
Clean code -- I can't stress this enough because far too many people write exceptionally ugly code. If you're code is ugly and/or unreadable, it may be easier for me to write it from scratch on my own. At the very least, make your code consistent. If I can't understand the code, I won't feel comfortable with it.
Historical records explaining your changes. Seeing how the project has grown allows me to plan better. It also allows people to see how you learn from your mistakes and get a sense of your skill level. Compared to a forum, you can get a feel for how fast things get fixed and then placed in to a new release.
Think long and hard on what kind of license you want there. Public domain? BSD? GPL? More restrictive?
A note on whether or not you mind being contacted and if there are any restrictions in this. For example, would you mind updates? Me explaining security holes? Or perhaps you might use a forum or wiki?
The ability for me to get your latest work and/or nightly builds. SVN or something. This is useful so I know if a bug I found is already fixed.
I think that documentation is a key point for your project.
The document must indicate:
what is the purpose of your library
what are the main features
a really short tutorial, to make it run in 5 minutes.
Many examples
I let people trust my code in a number of projects, but I urge people to make and maintain their own tests, and I make sure that I'm content with the unit tests.
Documentation is always good, but I'm very guilty of finding time to do as much as I would like. But having the author fairly contactable is helpful.
Posting it in an open source repository such as code.google.com or sourceforge.net is probably where to start...
Next to attract attention, document clearly and succintly the purpose of the library / application as outline in one of the answer above.
Finally, blogging and direct mail exchanges happen...
One reason documentation helps people trust your code, is that they know whether a given feature is something which you intended the code to do (and which you will, all else being equal, preserve in future versions of the code), or something that the current code just so happens to do, but which might change at any time as a side-effect of a bugfix or just a refactor.
Some people prefer find out what code really does by looking at it, and that's fine, but documentation tells you (a) what the code is supposed to do, and with any luck (b) what the next version of the code will do. If I want to use your code long-term, and take bugfix updates as you provide them, then I need to know that you've designed an interface that I can rely on and that you're willing to stick to. Documenting it is a strong hint that you're at least trying to do that.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm currently studying computer science and looking for a good way to practice and hone my programming skills. Contributing to an open source project seems like a natural way to do this to me. I currently know Java, Python, and some C, but wanted to open this up to any established language.
In particular, I'm looking for a project that's fairly active and has a lot of work for less experienced coders.
A better known project such as Firefox might have the advantage of being more recognizable on a resume, but perhaps one could have a larger impact on a smaller project. Any thoughts on this?
Thanks in advance =) -Matt
A popular one to start on if you know C is GNOME - www.gnome.org
Another great thing to do is look for projects that need help by checking out the Help Wanted listings at Sourceforge:
http://sourceforge.net/people/
The Python website also has a Volunteer Opportunities page:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/VolunteerOpportunities
A good way to contribute also is to look at the websites and mailing lists of open source software you use on a regular basis and ask if they need help, or just browse through their bug trackers to see what you can help with. This would probably be more interesting for you as you'll probably be able to make more meaningful contributions quicker with an existing knowledge of the software.
Good luck!
First, it has to be something that you are interested in and will enjoy working on. Otherwise it may become a chore or you may not contribute as much as you might otherwise.
Second, I'd make sure the project is active and has people working on it who you can learn from (by seeing what they've done and any changes they might make to your code once you check it in and they review it).
Finally, if you have any idea what you might want to do when you look for employment as a developer, then try to find something related to that area of programming, a tool that is used by developers in that field for example, as that will help you learn about the problem domain, as well as how to program, which help improve your cv/resume.
Whichever sounds fun to do, that's a rule of thumb for side projects for me. I'd suggest you start your own by the way, this is always more exciting and can teach you "get the things done" skill.
I prefer contributing to an open-source project already actove. Depending on what you want you will find games, databases..anything you's think about surely needs your contribution.
My really first contribution was to a game that used opengl ...space stariods i think, it was more like an optimization, or bug fix, i dont really remember.
I've done a plugin for GAIM (now known as Pidgin).. but never get to publish it as it changed name and api structure. It should have display the currently played song in the status-bar..with lots of configure options. Never finished it though.
Another thing was a 'echo' plugin for XMMS, but i found some bugs, it crashed easily and random (during development phase) ..and it was no longer maintained in the moment i've started developing, so left it in the dark also:) This one i liked a lot.. lots of cool and weird sound effects.
They were all cool as they all used different structures, and already established rules for coding, and commenting. Lots of thing to learn like this instead of starting my own project which wouldn't change my programming skills in any way:)
jHeidi is a program I like to use, but which is a bit buggy and could do with some development. It's written in Java.
There's a clear roadmap: It's following the more advanced development of its sister project HeidiSQL.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
After some stupid musings about Klingon languages, that came from this post I began a silly hobby project creating a Klingon programming language that compiles to Lua byte-code. During the initial language design phase I looked up information about Klingon programmers, and found out about this Klingon programming rule:
A TRUE Klingon Warrior does not comment his code!
So I decided my language would not support commenting, as any good Klingon would never use them.
Now many of the Klingon ways don't seem reasonable to us Human programmers, however while dabbling with the design and implementation of my hobby language I came to realize that this Klingon rule about commenting is indeed very reasonable, if not great.
Removing the ability to comment from a programming language meant I HAVE to write literate code, no exceptions.
So it got me wondering if there are any languages out there that don't support comments?
Is there are any really good arguments to not remove commenting from a language?
Edit: Any good examples of comments required?
P.S.> My hobby language above is partially silly anyways, so don't focus too much on my implementation, as much as the concept of comments required in general
Do not comment WHAT you are doing, but WHY you are doing it.
The WHAT is taken care of by clean, readable and simple code with proper choice of variable names to support it. Comments show a higher level structure to the code that can't be (or is hard to) show by the code itself.
I am not sure I agree with the "Have" in the statement "Removing the ability to comment from a programming language meant I HAVE to write literate code, no exceptions", since it is not as if all code is documented. My guess is that most people would write unreadable code.
More to the point, I personally do not believe in the reality of the self-explanatory program or API in the practical world.
My experience from manually analyzing the documentation of entire APIs for my dissertation suggests that all too often you would have to carry more information than you could convey in the signature alone. If you eliminate interface comments from your language, what are the alternatives? No documentation is not an option. External documentation is less likely to be read.
As for internal documentation, I can see your point in wanting to reduce documentation to convince people to write better. However, comments serve many collaboration and coordination purposes and are meant to raise awareness of things. By banishing these details to extenral locations, you are reducing the chances that they come to a future reader's awareness, unless your tooling is great.
Ugh, not being able to quickly comment out a line (or lines) during testing sounds annoying to me, especially when scripting.
In general comments are a wart that indicates poor design, especially long rambling comments where its clear the developer didn't have a clue what the heck they where doing and tried to make up for it by writing a comment.
Places where comments are useful:
Leaving a ticket number next to a fix so future programmers can understand business requirements
Explaining a particularly tricky hack
Commentary on business logic for a piece of code
Terse descriptions in API docs so a third-party can use your API
In all circumstances programmers should endeavor to write code that is descriptive and NOT write comments that describe poorly written code. That being said I think there are plenty of valid reasons that languages should and must support comments.
Your code has two distinct audiences:
The compiler
Human beings like us
If you choose to remove comments altogether, the assumption you are taking is that you will be catering only to the compiler, and to nothing else.
Of course you, being Klingon, may not need comments because you are not human. Perhaps you could clearly demonstrate to us your ability by speaking in IL instead?
You don't need a single assertion in your code because, in release mode, they're all gone. But when C++ didn't have assertions built-in, someone wrote the assert macro to replace it.
Of course you don't need comments, either, for more or less the same reason. But if you design a language without comments, people will start doing things like:
HelperFunctionDoesNothing("This is a comment! Blah Blah Blah...");
I'm curious. How do you stop someone from declaring a static string containing a comment and then ignoring the variable for the rest of the func/method/procedure/battle/whatever?
var useless_comment = "Can we destroy our enemies?"
if (phasers on full) return Qapla'
Languages need comments. At least 95% of comments can be replaced by clearer code but there are still assumptions you need to document and you absolutely need to document if there's some external problem you are working around.
I never write a comment without first considering if I can change the code to eliminate the need for it but sometimes you can't.
While all source code is copyrighted by default. It is often nice to:
remind the person reading the source code that it is subject to copyright
tell people what the licensing terms are for that source code file
tell them whether or not they are looking at a protected trade secret
Unfortunately, without comments, it is difficult to do this.
Am I the only one who comments out a couple of lines code for a number of purposes?
It's going to be harder than you think to make a language where comments are impossible.
if (false) {
print("This is a comment. Chew on that, Klingons!")
}
While it's true that humans need to be able to comment code, it is not absolutely necessary that the language directly support commenting: for most languages, it would be trivial to write a script that deletes one line comments (for example, all lines beginning with '#' or some other character) then runs the compiler.
Actually, though, I am surprised and disappointed to learn that even my favorite esoteric programming languages support comments: Brainf**k and Whitespace. These languages are meant to be hard to read, so it seems like they shouldn't support commenting. (As opposed to my other favorite esoteric language: LOLCode, which is meant to be self-documenting, in lolcats-speech)
I would dissent from the other answerers on this point: I say, be true to your vision of a Klingon programming language, and do not support comments!
A point against comments is that they tend to often fall out of date with the code. Any time you add a redundancy, you're risking this sort of inconsistency.
There's actually some interesting research that I've seen when a group used NLP to analyze locking comments in some large system and then compare them to the results of static analysis and were able to fix a few bugs that way.
Isn't literate programming as much comment as it is code? Certainly, much of what I've seen of literate programming has as much explanation as code, if not more comment.
You might think that developers writing in your language will make an extra effort to write clear code but the onus will actually be on you to design a language that's so expressive that it doesn't need to be commented. Hell, not even English is like that (we still parenthesize!). If your language isn't so designed it may very well be as usable as Brainfuck and enjoy the popularity and respect of Brainfuck.
Should I add links or are links considered commentlike?
Besides, people will find ways to add comments if they need to by highjacking strings and misusing variable names (that do nothing other than stand in for comments). Have you read Godel Escher Bach?
It will be a bad idea to remove the commenting facility altogether. Surely developers must learn to write code with minimum comments i.e. to write self documenting code but there a lot of cases where one has to explain why something is being done the way it is. Consider the following cases:
a new developer might start maintaining the code and the original dev has left/ out of the project
a change in specification or market requirement leads to something that is counter intuitive
copy right notice especially if open source (some open source libs require you to do this)
It is also my experience that new programmers tend to comment more and as they develop expertise their code tends to become self documenting and concise. In general comments should be about WHY and not HOW or WHAT.
NO -- there is not a single programming language out there that requires comments.
The language is for the computer. The comments are for the humans. You can write a program with 0% comments. It'll execute, rightly or wrongly. You can't write a program with 100% comments. It'll either not compile -- no main(), etc. -- or, for scripting languages, do exactly nothing.
And, besides, real programmers don't comment their code. Just like Klingons.
While I agree with Uri's responses, I too have made a language with no comments. (ichbins.) The language was to be as simple as possible while still being able to express its own compiler cleanly; since you can do that without comments, they got jettisoned.
I'm working off and on on a revision that does support commentary, but a bit differently: literate-programming style with code nested in text instead of comments embedded in code. It might also get examples/test-cases later as a first-class language feature.
Good luck with the Klingon hacking. :-)
I can't tell you how thankful I am for Javadoc - which is really simple to set up within comments. So that's at least one sense in which comments are useful.
No, of course a language doesn't have to have commenting. But a (useful) program does have to have comments... I don't agree with your idea that literate code lacks comments. Some very good code is easily comprehensible with comments, but only with difficulty without.
I think the comments are required in many situations.
For instance, think of the algorithmic ones. Suppose there is a function written in C which solves the Traveling Salesperson Problem, there are wide range of techniques that can be used to deal with this problem. And the codes are usually cryptic by its nature.
Without explicitly describing the parameters and the algorithm used, by using comments, it is almost impossible to reuse this piece of code.
Can we live without comments on code? Sure, but that won't make live easier.
Comments are useful because they reassure the person reading your code - probably the "future you" - that you've thought about her welfare.
I think the question may become how self-contained would the language without comments be? If for example, it compiles down to DLLs that get used within other code, then how does one know anything beyond the function signature in terms of what it requires, changes and returns? I wouldn't want to have function names being dozens of characters to try to express what may be very easily done with comments above the function that can be used as documentation within something like the Object Browser within Visual Studio for example.
Of course!!
The main reason is novice developers. Not everyone knows how to write literate code. Actually there are millions out there don't get a NullPointerException when they see one.
We all start at some point.
But if you're targeting to "expert" developers only, why bother in the language in first place. You should be using butterflies !!! That's what real developer use!
Comments is a must, try to make it harder if you wish ( like using #//##/ sequence to create a comment or something like that ) but don't leave it out.
:)
I agree with you that nicely written code does not need any comments as "Code is only good documentation available to programmer. However this is very ideal condition, not everyone writes good code all time.
So to make poorly written code good in future comments are required.
I once wrote a VB app (a silly board game inspired by Monopoly) without any comments. But I did that just to piss off my teacher, who had told us comments were for "whatever we found relevant, so we could remember it later".
Perfect code needs zero comments. It should be simple, and understandible by complete novices.
Any code needs comments, I try to explain the reason for and workings of every function I write in 1 or 2 lines.
Code that explains itself only exists in a perfect world, there is always some weird hack or a reason to do something quick-n-dirty instead of the propper way.
The best thing to remember is to comment WHY code does what it does, good code explains WHAT it does 99% of the time.
Write something simple, like a piece of code that can solve a Sudoku puzzle (3 reasonably simple while loops) and try reading that 3 months later. You will immidiatly find something that isn't exactly clear.
Code is written once, but read many times over the course of its lifetime; thus it pays to optimize for readability. Clear and consistent naming of everything from constants to classes is necessary, but may or may not be sufficient to achieve this objective. If not, fill in the gaps with comments, and maintain them as you would the code.