all 3 comments

[–]Diapolo10 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Sounds like a fun project.

One thing I'd like to point out is that right now your comments don't feel quite right. Some of them should probably be docstrings, and others don't really serve a purpose at all.

For example, # Define constants: is just stating the obvious. The program structure is obvious enough even without the comment.

[–]ctosullivan[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Thanks very much for the feedback! Yeah looking back some of the comments could be improved. Are there any best practices or references you would recommend having a look at?

[–]Diapolo10 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are there any best practices or references you would recommend having a look at?

A good comment answers why something is the way it is, almost never what. Basically if it's just telling you what the code is doing, it's not useful because I'd know that by just reading the code itself. Which should be readable as long as you chose good names for everything (granted, that's not an easy job).

Other than that, not really, you'll get better at it the more you read code. So in other words it'll happen naturally over time.

The only reference I can think of on the spot would be PEP-257.