Punctuation is mostly a medieval invention although we would not use it fully until about the Renaissance. In fact if you go back to the ancient era, all writing was in capitals without spaces. ASENTENCEWOULDLOOKLIKETHIS. So if you're reading a modern book of Latin all these marks have been added, and sometimes I ponder the editor's decisions. Let's take this:

ego sub quadam fici arbore stravi me nescio quomodo, habens lacrimis, et proruperunt flumina oculorum meorum^*

I would translate this as, "I was laid out under some fig tree, I don't know how, crying, and rivers rushing out from my eyes." Notice where I put the commas. The editor didn't do that and just wrote straight, "I was laid out under some fig tree I don't know how." When I first came across this I had to read it three or four times before I realized these were actually two separate sentences due to the lack of serious demarcation between the two clauses.

What threw me off is he properly did it for the "crying" (habens lacrmis), so I just assumed the whole thing would be separated properly. In a weird way I feel either he should've done it correctly or not at all because if you half-ass it, I'm then put into a half-Latin, half-English mode in my head where I assume commas mean something, and if you don't follow the modern rules then I'm completely confused. If there's nothing at all, I'm in a complete Latin mode and just figure out where the sentence ends naturally.

This happens all the time and I wonder why. I know in modern English the comma's status and usage is up for debate, but there are certain things I think we can agree on. That editors are constantly fucking this up confuses me. This is your job. This should only happen once in a while, not in literally every single Latin book I've read.

^* Augustine, Confessions Book VIII Chapter 12.