If the adopters of programs merely look at them, fathom out how they think they work, then try to remember that .... what use is that (perhaps considerable) effort to anyone else? Surely the adopters need to write something down about how they think 'their' programme works, in a form that anyone else can immediately see.Hated Moron wrote: ↑Mon 12 Jun 2023, 08:37 It was entirely your choice to add REMs, I never asked for it (I didn't, nor would I wish to, specify any particular process); it's a perfectly good way of recording notes about how the code works. but others may wish to trust their own memory or use another approach.
REMs are probably the best way, as they would be inline with the programme code. If one writes notes elsewhere and the code ever changes it's much less likely that anyone will update the notes and keep them in-sync.
Also, if it were me investigating how one of these programmes works, I might - apart from REMs - have scattered various PRINT statements (or PRINTs to a file, or most-likely: calls of the Win32 OutputDebugString function, for viewing info via the SysInternals "DebugView" application) though them to track what some of the variables do ... and I might have tied those minor explorations to comments in the notes. All of that is worth preserving, even if it's in a separate copy of the programme.
