doc contradicts itself about the result of SDL_MostSignificantBitIndex32(0)

[sleeptightAnsiC]

The current doc page about SDL_MostSignificantBitIndex32 is like so:

SDL/include/SDL3/SDL_bits.h

Lines 48 to 67 in ad91384

	/**
	* Get the index of the most significant (set) bit in a 32-bit number.
	*
	* Result is undefined when called with 0. This operation can also be stated
	* as "count leading zeroes" and "log base 2".
	*
	* Note that this is a forced-inline function in a header, and not a public
	* API function available in the SDL library (which is to say, the code is
	* embedded in the calling program and the linker and dynamic loader will not
	* be able to find this function inside SDL itself).
	*
	* \param x the 32-bit value to examine.
	* \returns the index of the most significant bit, or -1 if the value is 0.
	*
	* \threadsafety It is safe to call this function from any thread.
	*
	* \since This function is available since SDL 3.2.0.
	*/
	SDL_FORCE_INLINE int SDL_MostSignificantBitIndex32(Uint32 x)
	{

in one place it says:

Result is undefined when called with 0

but in another:

returns [...] -1 if the value is 0.

so those notes are contradictory to one another. I quickly looked into all pp branches and each one seems to be handling this case with return -1, so the claim about it causing UB looks like some leftover (?)

Mind clarifying this one?

[slouken]

Fixed, thanks!