When commenting classes (I really like that CCC movement), I'd suggest to mostly omit implementation details, code critics or discussions of alternatives.
So the False's class comment is right in warning people that its methods have no senders. It might even give a hint how to use them but that's enough.
Oh yeah, and this is true for both True and False. So maybe we should just put this stuff in class Boolean, instead of duplicating it in two places.
Even more important IMHO is to always thing about that when reading a comment it should be self contained. That means we don't want to move parts of the comment to the superclass only because that part is true for multiple subclasses. If the part is really large, we might thing about an explicit "see superclass for more details" but othervise, I'd vote to a small redundancy in favor for comments you can understand without knowing the context. Keep in mind, the comment is for references not just a part of a larger explaination.
bye -- Stefan Matthias Aust // Bevor wir fallen, fallen wir lieber auf.