从技术上讲，这不是一个评论，而是在凌晨2点左右编写的代码:

consent = False

．.． 该变量永远不会再次使用，并且出现在套接字的监听循环的开始。

我看到有人对代码的评论:

// This comment is self explanatory.

我猜他是想说“可变的”，但这个错误造成了一个有趣的评论……想想这里的循环逻辑，以及写它的徒劳。

catch
{     
    // you’re fucked
    // write out the file somewhere and start screaming “Connection down! Connection down!”
}

// drunk, fix later

真希望我是在开玩笑。根据编写代码的开发人员的了解，我认为他是认真的。

struct core_unlocker
{
    core_unlocker(lock)
    {
        m_lock = lock
        unlock(lock)  //Abandon All Locks, Ye Who Enter Core!
    }
    ~core_unlocker()
    {
        lock(m_lock)
    }  
    private:
    Corelock m_lock;
}

// I know the line below is wrong, but it came that way from our IP vendor, and 
// the driver won't work if you "fix" it. I've had to revert this change 4 times
// now. Leave it alone, or I will hunt you down and hurt you
if (r = 0) {
    /* bunch of code here */
}
else
{
   /* even more code here */
}