On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:44:42PM +0100, Mats Kindahl wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 9:53 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> > wrote: >> and I think we should expand on some of the commentary in int.h. >> For example, the comment at the top of int.h seems very tailored to the >> existing functions and should probably be adjusted. > > > I rewrote the beginning to the following, does that look good? > > * int.h > * Routines to perform signed and unsigned integer arithmetics, including > * comparisons, in an overflow-safe way. > > > >> And the "comparison >> routines for integers" comment might benefit from some additional details >> about the purpose and guarantees of the new functions. >> > > I expanded that into the following. WDYT? > > /*------------------------------------------------------------------------ > * Comparison routines for integers. > * > * These routines are used to implement comparison functions for, e.g., > * qsort(). They are designed to be efficient and not risk overflows in > * internal computations that could cause strange results, such as INT_MIN > > * INT_MAX if you just return "lhs - rhs". > *------------------------------------------------------------------------
LGTM. I might editorialize a bit before committing, but I think your proposed wording illustrates the thrust of the change.