docs: remove unnecessary require statements

[Planeshifter]

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request removes a redundant require statement from the JSDoc @example blocks in two @stdlib/blas/ext/base/wasm packages so their documentation matches the established namespace convention.

Both packages document the exported routine via @name/@type {Routine} and reference the symbol directly in each @example, yet also re-require themselves — a line absent from every other package in the namespace and from all packages in the mature @stdlib/blas/base/wasm sibling namespace. The examples now require only @stdlib/array/float64. Conformance to the majority convention: 8 of 10 namespace packages; 33 of 33 blas/base/wasm packages.

blas/ext/base/wasm/dasumpw

Removed the require( '@stdlib/blas/ext/base/wasm/dasumpw' ) line from both @example blocks in lib/main.js. The routine symbol is already documented via @name/@type, so the self-require was redundant and inconsistent with the namespace.

blas/ext/base/wasm/dnansumkbn2

Removed the require( '@stdlib/blas/ext/base/wasm/dnansumkbn2' ) line from both @example blocks in lib/main.js. Documentation-only; the exported API and behavior are unchanged.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

None.

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request?

The change is documentation-only and confined to JSDoc @example comments; no source behavior, signatures, tests, or benchmarks are affected. These two packages were the only deviators in the namespace on this feature; the deviation was validated against sibling packages before applying the fix.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance.

This pull request was produced by Claude Code running an automated cross-package documentation drift-detection routine. Claude extracted structural and semantic documentation features across the blas/ext/base/wasm namespace, identified the majority @example convention, validated the two deviating packages against their siblings, and applied the mechanical removal. A maintainer reviews before merge.

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

---

Generated by Claude Code

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
blas/ext/base/wasm/dasumpw	$\\color{green}554/554$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}17/17$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}6/6$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}554/554$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$
blas/ext/base/wasm/dnansumkbn2	$\\color{green}545/545$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}17/17$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}6/6$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}545/545$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.