-//@ Wait, `&b`? Why that? Well, we implemented `IntoIterator` for `&BigInt`, so we have to borrow `b`. If we wanted to be able to write
-//@ just `b`, we'd have to also implement `IntoIterator` for `BigInt` - which, as already mentioned, would mean that `b` is actually consumed
-//@ by the iteration, and gone. This can easily happen, for example, with a `Vec`: Both `Vec` and `&Vec` implement `IntoIterator`, so if
-//@ you do `for e in v`, and `v` has type `Vec`, then you will obtain ownership of the elements during the iteration - and destroy the vector
-//@ in the process. We actually did that in `vec_min`, but we did not care. You can write `for e in &v` or `for e in v.iter()` to avoid this.
+//@ Wait, `&b`? Why that? Well, we implemented `IntoIterator` for `&BigInt`. If we are in a place where `b` is already borrowed, we can
+//@ just do `for digit in b`. If however, we own `b`, we have to create a reference to it. Alternatively, we could implement `IntoIterator`
+//@ for `BigInt` - which, as already mentioned, would mean that `b` is actually consumed by the iteration, and gone. This can easily happen,
+//@ for example, with a `Vec`: Both `Vec` and `&Vec` (and `&mut Vec`) implement `IntoIterator`, so if you do `for e in v`, and `v` has type `Vec`,
+//@ then you will obtain ownership of the elements during the iteration - and destroy the vector in the process. We actually did that in
+//@ `part01::vec_min`, but we did not care. You can write `for e in &v` or `for e in v.iter()` to avoid this.