Alex Rousskov

> my concern was if there might be other cases where this kind of looping would occur Your concern is valid, and your work on addressing that concern (to the...

> [2] Consider using `std::nextafter(0.0, 1.0)` for that minimum increase/delay. Actually, using `std::nexttoward(0, 1)` may be slightly better because it avoids spelling out unnecessary details (i.e., the `double` type of...

@yadij, during the next review round, I urge you to focus on truth tables rather than method names or descriptions. Once you have no blocking issues with how the compiled...

> This request does not make sense to me. The truth table correctness (or not) depends on the name and description matching up with the values in its table. To...

@yadij, please move this `review-1` PR forward. It has been stuck waiting for your review for more than a month. Thank you.

@yadij, please move this `review-1` PR forward. It has been stuck waiting for your review for more than two months. Thank you.

@yadij, please move this `review-1` PR forward. It (and the work depending on it) has been stuck waiting for your review for more than three months. Thank you.

@yadij, please move this `review-1` PR forward. It (and the work depending on it) has been stuck waiting for your review for more than four months. If you do not...

Reopening per Board meeting agreement.

This PR was waiting for sub-PRs #993, #994, and #1006. All those are merged now. There is at least one unaddressed change request that may require another sub-PR -- https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/pull/835#discussion_r810447983...