  We respond to [1] which claimed that "Modulo-SK scheme outperforms Deepcode
[2]". We demonstrate that this statement is not true: the two schemes are
designed and evaluated for entirely different settings. DeepCode is designed
and evaluated for the AWGN channel with (potentially delayed) uncoded output
feedback. Modulo-SK is evaluated on the AWGN channel with coded feedback and
unit delay. [1] also claimed an implementation of Schalkwijk and Kailath (SK)
[3] which was numerically stable for any number of information bits and
iterations. However, we observe that while their implementation does marginally
improve over ours, it also suffers from a fundamental issue with precision.
Finally, we show that Deepcode dominates the optimized performance of SK, over
a natural choice of parameterizations when the feedback is noisy.
