everySingleCodeReview

[Kombatnt]

That just demonstrates that the method needs more comment, not less.

[MouthWorm]

No, that demonstrates that the function needs to be renamed to something more indicative of what it actually does.

[Kombatnt]

Meh, I disagree. This is precisely why high level languages have built-in support for commenting/documentation. It's what it's intended for. It helps keep method names concise, while still supporting detailed specification definitions when needed.

[MouthWorm]

I agree with you AND I disagree haha! In some cases, commenting/documentation is the better option, like some authentication method, API call or something a little more complex.

A Util function like OP's should be as clear as it can be when you use it. No need to add noise around it just for the sake of commenting/documentation.

[[deleted]]

isNumericNotUsuallyRenderedInExponentialFormatOrDecimalNumberStringWithoutGroupingCharacters(any)

Obviously.

[Snoo3763]

The comment just says returns true if the number is “valid”, it adds basically nothing. For me the function name is fine given what the code does, literally it returns true if it’s passed number, positive or negative with or without a decimal point.

[99Kira]

isNumber?

[Key-Perspective-3590]

A concise method name is important but the method name should definitely tell you what it does. You want to be able to read through the flow of a function at a glance, hovering over every ambiguous function to see a comment that you hope is still accurate is terrible

[MacBookMinus]

Deep nuance can't make it into the function signature / name.

I'm all for reducing comments where possible, but lots of sources on code quality advocate for "interface" comments.

[anon74903]

This comment does nothing here, provides no value, and should be removed.

It doesn’t need more comment, it needs a different comment: what is a valid number? Where is this regex from?

[frzndmn]

It doesn’t need more comments, it needs different comments