|  | # Documentation Best Practices | 
|  |  | 
|  | "Say what you mean, simply and directly." - [Brian Kernighan] | 
|  | (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Programming_Style) | 
|  |  | 
|  | [TOC] | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Minimum viable documentation | 
|  |  | 
|  | A small set of fresh and accurate docs is better than a large | 
|  | assembly of "documentation" in various states of disrepair. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Write short and useful documents. Cut out everything unnecessary, while also | 
|  | making a habit of continually massaging and improving every doc to suit your | 
|  | changing needs. **Docs work best when they are alive but frequently trimmed, | 
|  | like a bonsai tree**. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Update docs with code | 
|  |  | 
|  | **Change your documentation in the same CL as the code change**. This keeps your | 
|  | docs fresh, and is also a good place to explain to your reviewer what you're | 
|  | doing. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Delete dead documentation | 
|  |  | 
|  | Dead docs are bad. They misinform, they slow down, they incite despair in | 
|  | new community members and laziness in existing ones. They set a precedent | 
|  | for leaving behind messes in a code base. If your home is clean, most | 
|  | guests will be clean without being asked. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Just like any big cleaning project, **it's easy to be overwhelmed**. If your | 
|  | docs are in bad shape: | 
|  |  | 
|  | *   Take it slow, doc health is a gradual accumulation. | 
|  | *   First delete what you're certain is wrong, ignore what's unclear. | 
|  | *   Get the whole community involved. Devote time to quickly scan every doc and | 
|  | make a simple decision: Keep or delete? | 
|  | *   Default to delete or leave behind if migrating. Stragglers can always be | 
|  | recovered. | 
|  | *   Iterate. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Prefer the good over the perfect | 
|  |  | 
|  | Documentation is an art. There is no perfect document, there are only proven | 
|  | methods and prudent guidelines. See | 
|  | go/g3doc-style#good. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Documentation is the story of your code | 
|  |  | 
|  | Writing excellent code doesn't end when your code compiles or even if your | 
|  | test coverage reaches 100%. It's easy to write something a computer understands, | 
|  | it's much harder to write something both a human and a computer understand. Your | 
|  | mission as a Code Health-conscious engineer is to **write for humans first, | 
|  | computers second.** Documentation is an important part of this skill. | 
|  |  | 
|  | There's a spectrum of engineering documentation that ranges from terse comments | 
|  | to detailed prose: | 
|  |  | 
|  | 1.  **Inline comments**: The primary purpose of inline comments is to provide | 
|  | information that the code itself cannot contain, such as why the code is | 
|  | there. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2.  **Method and class comments**: | 
|  |  | 
|  | *   **Method API documentation**: The header / Javadoc / docstring | 
|  | comments that say what methods do and how to use them. This | 
|  | documentation is **the contract of how your code must behave**. The | 
|  | intended audience is future programmers who will use and modify your | 
|  | code. | 
|  |  | 
|  | It is often reasonable to say that any behavior documented here should | 
|  | have a test verifying it. This documentation details what arguments the | 
|  | method takes, what it returns, any "gotchas" or restrictions, and what | 
|  | exceptions it can throw or errors it can return. It does not usually | 
|  | explain why code behaves a particular way unless that's relevant to a | 
|  | developer's understanding of how to use the method. "Why" explanations | 
|  | are for inline comments. Think in practical terms when writing method | 
|  | documentation: "This is a hammer. You use it to pound nails." | 
|  |  | 
|  | *   **Class / Module API documentation**: The header / Javadoc / docstring | 
|  | comments for a class or a whole file. This documentation gives a brief | 
|  | overview of what the class / file does and often gives a few short | 
|  | examples of how you might use the class / file. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Examples are particularly relevant when there's several distinct ways to | 
|  | use the class (some advanced, some simple). Always list the simplest | 
|  | use case first. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 3.  **README.md**: A good README.md orients the new user to the directory and | 
|  | points to more detailed explanation and user guides: | 
|  | * What is this directory intended to hold? | 
|  | * Which files should the developer look at first? Are some files an API? | 
|  | * Who maintains this directory and where I can learn more? | 
|  |  | 
|  | 4.  **Design docs, PRDs**: A good design doc or PRD discusses the proposed | 
|  | implementation at length for the purpose of collecting feeback on that | 
|  | design. However, once the code is implemented, design docs should serve as | 
|  | archives of these decisions, not as half-correct docs (they are often | 
|  | misused). See | 
|  | [Implementation state](#Implementation-state-determines-document-repository) | 
|  | below. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Implementation state determines document repository | 
|  |  | 
|  | **If the doc is about implemented code, put it in README.md**. If it's | 
|  | pre-implementation discussion, including Design docs, PRDs, and presentations, | 
|  | keep it in shared Drive folders. | 
|  |  | 
|  | ## Duplication is evil | 
|  |  | 
|  | Do not write your own guide to a common technology or process. Link to it | 
|  | instead. If the guide doesn't exist or it's badly out of date, submit your | 
|  | updates to the appropriate docs/ directory or create a package-level | 
|  | README.md. **Take ownership and don't be shy**: Other teams will usually welcome | 
|  | your contributions. |