I think I'd rather just get rid of the pointless line break, non?

Of the surrounding comments, if that was done to the one below, it would merge the comments. Although it can be done for the one in the fix and the one above it, the current style is most general. What do you think? Do we keep the one below and remove them from the two above.

  swap(t1, t2);     // OK: uses swappable conditions for lvalues of type \tcode{T}

Oh, you mean like that?

Yes.

Done.

Thanks!

Looks good to me.

Oh, wait, this would overrun the line, right? Can you render it and see what it looks like? I didn't realize how far out the comment is. If it doesn't fit, let's go back to the original proposal.

I'll try rendering it. I think I've never done it before. However, I thought it was fine by looking at the code, as the comment's font should be mostly shorter than the code's monospaced font.

If it was to match the column of the other comments, it wouldn't fit, so I had moved it to the preferred 20th column.

Actually, I just assumed it wouldn't fit, but it does. Now I know I should render in these cases.

Oh, does it actually fit? Great.

I just tried it out locally; the change does not cause an overfull hbox.

@jensmaurer: That's not relevant, though: what matters is that there isn't a line break. Long comments will happily go on as many lines as they need, all neatly justified. So the important check here was that it fits on one line. But it seems to!