This makes their intent and expected location clearer. We see some
examples where these comments were not clearly separate from `use`
declarations, which made it hard to understand what the comment is
describing.
Since all output characters taken from `BASE_64` are valid UTF8 chars
there is no need to waste cycles on validation.
Even though it's obviously a perf win, I've also used a [benchmark](https://gist.github.com/ttsugriy/e1e63c07927d8f31e71695a9c617bbf3)
on M1 MacBook Air with following results:
```
Running benches/base_n_benchmark.rs (target/release/deps/base_n_benchmark-825fe5895b5c2693)
push_str/old time: [14.670 µs 14.852 µs 15.074 µs]
Performance has regressed.
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
4 (4.00%) high mild
7 (7.00%) high severe
push_str/new time: [12.573 µs 12.674 µs 12.801 µs]
Performance has regressed.
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
7 (7.00%) high mild
4 (4.00%) high severe
```
This minor change removes the need to reverse resulting digits.
Since reverse is O(|digit_num|) but bounded by 128, it's unlikely
to be a noticeable in practice. At the same time, this code is
also a 1 line shorter, so combined with tiny perf win, why not?
I ran https://gist.github.com/ttsugriy/ed14860ef597ab315d4129d5f8adb191
on M1 macbook air and got a small improvement
```
Running benches/base_n_benchmark.rs (target/release/deps/base_n_benchmark-825fe5895b5c2693)
push_str/old time: [14.180 µs 14.313 µs 14.462 µs]
Performance has improved.
Found 5 outliers among 100 measurements (5.00%)
4 (4.00%) high mild
1 (1.00%) high severe
push_str/new time: [13.741 µs 13.839 µs 13.973 µs]
Performance has improved.
Found 8 outliers among 100 measurements (8.00%)
3 (3.00%) high mild
5 (5.00%) high severe
```
The PR had some unforseen perf regressions that are not as easy to find.
Revert the PR for now.
This reverts commit 6ae8912a3e, reversing
changes made to 86d6d2b738.
