-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here #132880
Conversation
ac70558
to
2c7f3ba
Compare
I have tried a different wording, hopefully it is better now. |
lgtm |
@workingjubilee is that a "r=me"? |
Ja, ich billige :^) |
Thanks :)
@bors r=workingjubilee rollup
|
…jubilee target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
seems spurious? @bors retry |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (71042b4): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 786.407s -> 787.302s (0.11%) |
Thanks for entertaining our nit picks on comments. What I mentioned earlier is a sentiment that comments should explain what code cannot. If the comment is code-like, then it should be code. I'm being idealistic here, I'm not asking you to refactor code. What you've added in this PR achieves the desired intent. I'm curious if you agree that code-like comments are a sign that the code itself isn't clear enough to describe what it's doing to the reader. |
I don't think my comment was code-like. It was a comment on the level of mathematical logic, which -- in this case -- is at a higher level of abstraction than the code. Maybe you consider that code-like in the sense of being a formal language, but I think a comment that explains low-level code in terms of a higher-level formal language can be quite valuable. |
I also do not think it was a "code-like comment", or certainly it seemed just as well to have a different phrasing. My remark was only because the sequences of starts-and-stops, plus an aside, made puzzling out the meaning, while possible, slightly nonintuitive. Kind of like that sentence, actually. |
…jubilee target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here
Interesting, I see your perspective now that you put it that way 🙂 |
No description provided.