Skip to content

docs: fix example return annotation in number/float16/base/assert/is-same-value - #15038

Draft
Planeshifter wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
philipp/fix-commit-review-2026-09-06
Draft

docs: fix example return annotation in number/float16/base/assert/is-same-value#15038
Planeshifter wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
philipp/fix-commit-review-2026-09-06

Conversation

@Planeshifter

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

  • provides follow-up fixes for commits merged to develop between 2026-09-05T14:07:34-07:00 (a730ce8) and 2026-09-06T03:08:57-07:00 (6eb47fed)

Fixes by package:

number/float16/base/assert/is-same-value

  • float16/base/assert/is-same-value (1458b04): fix @example doc comment in src/main.c — both x and y were 5.0f, annotated // returns false; ported from float32/base/assert/is-same-value without updating the second operand. y is now stdlib_base_float32_to_float16( -5.0f ).

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

No.

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

Validation performed on the 39-commit window (union diff plus per-commit diffs):

  • style guide compliance audit (two independent passes) comparing each new/changed package against an established reference package (zlinspace/dlinspace for clinspace, gleft-pad-circular for the new pad packages, roundsd/trunc10 for the new f32 math packages, float32 assert equivalents for the float16 assert packages, dvariancech for svariancech)
  • bug scan of the diff (two independent passes), including hand-verification of documented // returns annotations, JS↔C parity for clinspace, clogspace, roundsdf, trunc10f, and float32/ulp-difference, and execution of all migrated ULP-based test suites

Deliberately excluded: anything requiring interpretation or judgment calls about author intent, and anything whose validation would require changes outside the window's diff. One candidate finding (byte-width-based dtype dispatch in array/base/assert/has-almost-equal-values/has-almost-same-values also matching 16-bit integer arrays) was dropped on those grounds: it mirrors the pre-existing byte-width dispatch convention in the same functions.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

  • Yes
  • No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

  • Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
  • Test/benchmark generation
  • Documentation (including examples)
  • Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

This PR was produced by an automated Claude Code review routine which audited the last 24 hours of commits merged to develop; the fix and PR description were written by Claude Code.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_016jv9hbAxmcYHYDkCayoo2c


Generated by Claude Code

…-same-value`

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016jv9hbAxmcYHYDkCayoo2c
@stdlib-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Coverage Report

Package Statements Branches Functions Lines
number/float16/base/assert/is-same-value $\\color{green}192/192$
$\\color{green}+100.00\\%$
$\\color{green}10/10$
$\\color{green}+100.00\\%$
$\\color{green}2/2$
$\\color{green}+100.00\\%$
$\\color{green}192/192$
$\\color{green}+100.00\\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants