Improve Comments for Pairwise Multiplication Optimization #5524
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
xu-shawn
force-pushed
the
pairwise-mul-comments
branch
8 times, most recently
from
59a4440
to
2c62951
Compare
no functional change
xu-shawn
force-pushed
the
pairwise-mul-comments
branch
from
2c62951
to
01fb6a6
Compare
Disservin
added
to be merged
mstembera
reviewed
Aug 2, 2024
| // to the left by 1, so we compensate by shifting less before | ||
| // the multiplication. | ||
|
|
||
| constexpr int shift = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This actually takes more lines than before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does but with the old way, the comment was intended wrongly by the formatter :/
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Inspired by #5522, better explains why we use (127 * 2). Feel free to point out any mistakes and errors, as this is my first time reading this part of the code.
Thanks to @FauziAkram for raising awareness and @Disservin for formatting suggestions.
no functional change