doc(stdlib): doc comments for BaseTrait

[i582]

This PR adds more documentation, as an example of the level I would like to see for the entire standard library!

The new documentation for BaseTrait shows how we document code in general.

• We use /// for documentation comments
• Any code examples are wrapped in three apostrophes

I think we need an RFC in which we will describe all such rules that everyone in the team agrees with. Everything described above is negotiable and I will be glad to hear your thoughts on how to further change and improve the documentation rules!

Towards #573

[anton-trunov]

what issue is it solving?

[anton-trunov]

I would argue cells.tact should either be left intact, or split into two files builder.tact (serialization) and slice.tact (deserialization).

[i582]

what issue is it solving?

#573
added to description

[i582]

I would argue cells.tact should either be left intact, or split into two files builder.tact (serialization) and slice.tact (deserialization).

Yeah, if this file layout is ok, I'll rename this file to cell.tact.

There are now also functions like asSlice for Builder and Slice that should be placed somewhere (together in a file like conversions.tact or split into cell.tact and builder.tact).

[anton-trunov]

or split into cell.tact and builder.tact

this is exactly what I'm arguing against:

• it's either everything in one file called cell.tact (or cells.tact as we have now),
• or builder.tact and slice.tact: you simply cannot do anything with cells as those are opaque (except passing around as stack values)

[anton-trunov]

Let's keep the changes for base.tact and revert the rest of them until we have a clear plan

[novusnota]

Nice job overall, I've only edited descriptions to match the rest of /// comments and their original source — the docs.

[anton-trunov]

LGTM, but let's give @novusnota the chance to comment