and also Knuth agreed, and that is why he invented literate programming.
But why literate programming isn't more popular is beyond me.
I saw this topic brought up in a video I was watching yesterday https://youtu.be/SzA2YODtgK4?t=1519
There are 2 reasons:
1. Programmers and code review tools are not very good at making sure comments and documentation are updated when code is.
2. People see literate programming as primarily for documentation-focused or teaching purposes.
The statistics in the article we're commenting on suggest that more software systems should be documentation/teaching focused, since the "learning the system" phase is where most of the time goes.
I agree. Specifically, it's for teaching my future forgetful self what the hell this bit of code is supposed to do. Especially if waterbed theory appears to apply and it's inherently a juggling act of interlocked complex systems.
One issue with literate programming is that it advertised a single narrative for code. Only code is data, and there are always many narratives about data. This change might look cosmetic, but it is actually fundamental.
In Glamorous Toolkit, beside having multiple views, we also embedded an interactive notebook right in the development environment and through it we tell interactive stories about the inside the system.
And shareholders to make money.