You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
I have added documentation of new methods and any new behavior or changes to existing behavior
CI Workflows Are Passing
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Corrected grammar in function documentation
Updated internal documentation references
Refactor
Updated internal circuit identifiers and naming conventions
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉
ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: eaa766fe-1352-4c4a-9280-f83989535945
📥 Commits
Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7e09763 and a87e84f.
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
contracts/src/math/Bytes8.compact
contracts/src/math/Uint128.compact
Walkthrough
Internal circuit naming refactored in Bytes8.compact (_vector8ToUint64 → _toUint64) with corresponding call site updates. Documentation corrections applied across Uint128.compact, including typo fixes and witness function name alignment in comments.
Renamed internal pure circuit from _vector8ToUint64 to _toUint64 and updated both toUint64(vec) and toUint64(bytes) to reference the new circuit identifier.
Fixed documentation phrasing in eq() method ("equal than" → "equal to"), renumbered comment steps in _div circuit, and updated witness function name reference in _sqrt circuit comments from wit_sqrtU128Locally to wit_sqrtU128.
Estimated code review effort
🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes
Poem
🐰 A refactor light, a name made clean,
Bytes and units, a queenly scheme,
Comments aligned with witness calls true,
No logic changed, just polish anew! ✨
Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check
✅ Passed
The title references 'n-01 typographical errors' which aligns with the actual changes—documentation improvements and naming corrections in Bytes8 and Uint128 contracts.
Docstring Coverage
✅ Passed
No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch fix/n-01
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Types of changes
What types of changes does your code introduce to OpenZeppelin Midnight Contracts?
Put an
xin the boxes that applyPartially OpenZeppelin/compact-contracts#434
PR Checklist
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Refactor