Improves documentation

Sources/Fuzzilli/Compiler/Compiler.swift

@@ -446,7 +446,6 @@ public class JavaScriptCompiler {
         case .breakStatement:
             // If we're in both .loop and .switch context, then the loop must be the most recent context 
             // (switch blocks don't propagate an outer .loop context) so we just need to check for .loop here
-            // TODO remove this comment once the Analyzer bug fixs has been merged. Until then the code in this switch case is buggy.
             if contextAnalyzer.context.contains(.loop){
                 emit(LoopBreak())
             } else if contextAnalyzer.context.contains(.switchBlock){

Sources/Fuzzilli/FuzzIL/Analyzer.swift

@@ -169,7 +169,8 @@ struct ContextAnalyzer: Analyzer {
                 newContext.formUnion(contextStack.secondToTop)
             }
 
-            // If we are in a loop, we don't want to propagate the switch context and vice versa.
+            // If we are in a loop, we don't want to propagate the switch context and vice versa. Otherwise we couldn't determine which break operation to emit.
+            // TODO Make this generic for similar logic cases as well. E.g. by using a instr.op.contextClosed list.
             if (instr.op.contextOpened.contains(.switchBlock) || instr.op.contextOpened.contains(.switchCase)) {
                 newContext.remove(.loop)
             } else if (instr.op.contextOpened.contains(.loop)) {

Tests/FuzzilliTests/AnalyzerTest.swift

@@ -305,6 +305,8 @@ class AnalyzerTests: XCTestCase {
         let _  = b.finalize()
     }
 
+    // Tests if the context is correctly identified in nested loops and switches. 
+    // Needs to work to distinguish when to emit LoopBreak and SwitchBreak.
     func testBreakContext() {
         let fuzzer = makeMockFuzzer()
         let b = fuzzer.makeBuilder()