dubslow

In addition to tweaks per comments, I've also made a further noticeable change to the DEPTH comments, since I'd just realized I was still missing half the interactions despite trying...

peregrine's most recent comment got my brain going once again, and ive now re-overhauled all the related comments. qs generals is at qs function, ttdepth comment doesn't mention the uses...

I went ahead and squashed onto master. For the commit history that I've gone thru today to reach the present point see here: https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/compare/master...dubslow:Stockfish:qsDepthStagesTouchupOld

Thanks to all the comments, every single comment resulted in some improvement.

~~> // Preserve any existing move for the same position if *the new* move is null~~

These aren't function names tho.

> I haven't seen using a different convention for method names only because they represent constants... How the heck often do you see methods representing constants????? That's a Bad Idea™...

> It has nothing to do with limitations, it can be easily done in the same soul the refactor did.. We have enum move_type, the same thing can be made...

Worth noting that cj's attempt to fix this with a gainer yielded a green STC, but a yellow LTC and a second, different style LTC is nearly yellow: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/663ce00dc0b75d7f7b981e06 https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/663d1831507ebe1c0e91f150...

Indeed, this strikes me as the sort of thing which wasn't for Elo but for minimizing explosions. So long as deleting it doesn't *gain* elo, probably better to keep it...