We comment on a paper that describes a closed-form formulation to Tensor Voting, a technique to perceptually group clouds of points, usually applied to infer features in images. The authors proved an analytic solution to the technique, a highly relevant contribution considering that the original formulation required numerical integration, a time-consuming task. Their work constitutes the first closed-form expression for the Tensor Voting framework. In this work we first observe that the proposed formulation leads to unexpected results which do not satisfy the constraints for a Tensor Voting output, hence they cannot be interpreted. Given that the closed-form expression is said to be an analytic equivalent solution, unexpected outputs should not be encountered unless there are flaws in the proof. We analyzed the underlying math to find which were the causes of these unexpected results. In this commentary we show that their proposal does not in fact provide a proper analytic solution to Tensor Voting and we indicate the flaws in the proof.