There are lots and lots of ways to write a function that passes a test, I want to know if there is a reason why you chose the approach you used.
As an example, I do both hardware and software. I might work on FPGA code for months and then move on to the embedded code that runs the board. It is possible to not have to touch the FPGA code for months.
If I then have to go and modify something, say, add a register to implement a function I need, comments are a life-saver because you need to do a hard "context switch" in your head. I don't have time to read through code and figure out how a particular chunk-o-code works or what I meant by it. With FPGA code, where you are likely dealing with code structures that are controlling signals in the nanosecond range, you can't wing it. It either works or it doesn't and even minor code changes can make the entire thing go from working to a friggin mess. Comments are the "user manual" to the code.
Later on I might have to go and work on the iOS app that might access this hardware. So now you have FPGA code, embedded code (runs the board that has the FPGA) and iOS code.
Once again, even when I could be the only developer in the project without comments the entire thing becomes unmanageable very, very quickly.