On 31/01/20 16:37, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > >> On 31 Jan 2020, at 08:46, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 31/01/20 07:11, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> May I present you Armbru's Comment Trust Levels: >>> >>> ACTL2: The comment may be overly terse or incomplete, but the >>> probability for it to be outright wrong is low. >>> >>> ACTL1: Treat as helpful guidance (with gratitude), but trust only the >>> code. >>> >>> ACTL0: It is a tale Told by an idiot[**], full of sound and fury, >>> Signifying nothing. >>> >>> Most comments in decently maintained code are at ACTL1. >>> >>> Around the time initial QOM development solidified, object.h's comments >>> were ACTL2. The neglect that is now clearly visible there makes me >>> downgrade to ACTL1. >>> >>> Paolo will have a more informed and possibly different opinion. >> >> I think around initial development it was ACTL3, now it's around 1.8. > > Interestingly, the initial doc suggested ACTL to be an whole value between > 0 and 2. Now it’s fractional and value 3 has a meaning you can guess > to be “above 2”…
I won't say if this was accidental or not. : Paolo > How fast this happened tells you everything you need to know about > documentation/specifications and actual implementations :-)
