[maxbond]

    steps = 3//Yes this is right

So, this comment ought to explain their reasoning and it doesn't, which is a shame - but isn't it concerning that this person was warning us that there was a reason this value was 3 and not 2, and that no one in the PR seems to know what that reason is and whether it's still relevant?

Who were you, mport2004? What did you see?

[jorvi]

Seems likely it’s an off-by-one error deeper in the code, and they decided to just work around it?

Reminds me of Chesterton’s Fence: you shouldn’t replace an old, out of place seemingly-useless fence unless you understand the cause for it being there.

[maxbond]

> ...and that no one in the PR seems to know what that reason is and whether it's still relevant?

Upon rereading I feel I was a but uncharitable here, with more context it's clear the reviewers don't need to look at this too closely because the blast radius is effectively zero, and I imagine the commiter did ask themselves this question and probably prioritized the aesthetic of the terse meme PR over a complete explanation (and fair enough).