On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 9:52 AM Andrew MacLeod <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2/4/26 11:35, David Malcolm wrote: > > One of the difficulties I ran into when familiarizing myself with > > value-range.{h,cc} is that the comments and classes refer to > > representations of "ranges", but the implementation has grown beyond > > mere ranges of values (such as with bitmasks and NaN-tracking). > > > > Arguably "range" could refer to the mathematical definition: the set > > of possible outputs of a function, but I find it much clearer to think > > of these classes as efficient representations of subsets of possible > > values of a type. > > > > This patch updates various leading comments in a way that clarifies > > the intent of these classes (for me, at least). > > > > Andrew: did I get all the details correct, and is this OK for trunk? > > (assuming it bootstraps) > > The clarifications are fine with me... Only the release managers can > approve it for trunk however. > > If they don't want it checked it in now, I can add it to my tree of > things for stage 1.
Comments changes/fixes are acceptable during stage 4 since comments are considered documentation rather than code. I thought this was mentioned before but I can't find it. Thanks, Andrew > > Andrew > >
