Open
Conversation
Member
AndyAyersMS
commented
Mar 3, 2026
AndyAyersMS
commented
- ensure all method have header comments
- remove /* */ comments unless in expression context
Convert old-style block comments to line comments across JIT flowgraph source files. Comments within function argument lists, template argument lists, and parameter default annotations are intentionally preserved. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Add //-------- banners and standardized header comments to methods that were missing them, following the JIT coding conventions format (method name, description, arguments, return value). Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Add missing Arguments and Return Value sections to method headers that had banners but were incomplete. Also fix typos in section labels (Arguments; -> Arguments:, Returns Value: -> Returns:) and a mismatched method name in a comment (FindCyclicProbabilities -> ComputeCyclicProbabilities). Add proper banner header to the standalone OperIsControlFlow function. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
github-actions
bot
added
the
area-CodeGen-coreclr
Member
Author
|
@dotnet/jit-contrib PTAL I can see this sort of thing will quickly become tedious to review; on the other hand I would also like to see us fix up these sorts of things. Thoughts...? |
Contributor
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR continues JIT flowgraph cleanup by standardizing function header comments and converting non-expression /* ... */ comments to // across several flowgraph-related source files.
Changes:
- Added/expanded header comment blocks (Arguments/Returns/Notes) for a number of flowgraph-related helpers and phases.
- Replaced many standalone
/* ... */comments with//comments to match the stated style direction.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 9 out of 9 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| src/coreclr/jit/fgwasm.cpp | Adds missing “Return Value” section for a phase method comment block. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgstmt.cpp | Replaces block comments with structured headers and // comments for statement helpers. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgprofilesynthesis.cpp | Normalizes comment formatting (e.g., // static, Arguments: punctuation) and updates a header label. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgprofile.cpp | Adds missing Arguments/Returns sections to various profile-related methods. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgopt.cpp | Converts many /* ... */ comments to // and normalizes header wording. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fginline.cpp | Adds missing Arguments sections and converts block comments to structured headers. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgehopt.cpp | Adds a “Return Value” section to a constructor header comment. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgdiagnostic.cpp | Adds structured headers and converts remaining block comments to line comments; minor comment refactors. |
| src/coreclr/jit/fgbasic.cpp | Converts block comments to structured headers and replaces many /* ... */ comments with //. |
| /*****************************************************************************/ | ||
|
|
||
| //------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ||
| // fgCheckForInlineDepthAndRecursion: compute depth of the candidate, and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The header comment name doesn't match the actual method name (fgCheckInlineDepthAndRecursion). This makes it harder to search/grep for documentation; update the comment to use the correct function name.
Suggested change
| // fgCheckForInlineDepthAndRecursion: compute depth of the candidate, and | |
| // fgCheckInlineDepthAndRecursion: compute depth of the candidate, and |
Comment on lines
+3017
to
+3018
| // Return Value: | ||
| // None (constructor). Initializes Traits and Visited members. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a constructor, so labeling a section as "Return Value" is misleading (constructors don't return values). Consider removing the Return Value section and moving this info to Notes/Remarks, or just omit it.
Suggested change
| // Return Value: | |
| // None (constructor). Initializes Traits and Visited members. | |
| // Notes: | |
| // Initializes Traits and Visited members. |
This file contains hidden or 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
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.