Group Typo Fixes 4 #5750
Group Typo Fixes 4 #5750
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
|
…ts into typo-fixes
…tracts into typo-fixes
Signed-off-by: sellskin <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ernesto García <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ernesto García <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: fifalodm <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ernesto García <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hadrien Croubois <[email protected]>
WalkthroughEditorial and minor code edits across contracts, docs, scripts, and tests: README token wording and Defender promo removed; import switched to Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 💡 Knowledge Base configuration:
You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration. 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (4)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)Type Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Co-authored-by: Arr00 <[email protected]>
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (2)
contracts/utils/cryptography/draft-ERC7739Utils.sol (2)
64-66: Repair broken sentence in NOTE.Second line “data instead.” is dangling; fold into a single clear sentence.
Apply this diff:
- * NOTE: This function returns empty if the input format is invalid instead of reverting. - * data instead. + * NOTE: This function returns empty values if the input format is invalid instead of reverting.
102-103: Grammar: “used to simulate”, not “used to simulates”.Tighten phrasing in the personal_sign note.
Apply this diff:
- * This is used to simulates the `personal_sign` RPC method in the context of smart contracts. + * This is used to simulate the `personal_sign` RPC method in the context of smart contracts.
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
contracts/mocks/docs/ERC4626Fees.sol (1)
48-61: Fix doc cross-references to point to ERC4626 hooks, not IERC4626IERC4626 doesn’t define
_deposit/_withdraw; these are ERC4626 internals. Update the links to avoid broken references.- /// @dev Send entry fee to {_entryFeeRecipient}. See {IERC4626-_deposit}. + /// @dev Send entry fee to {_entryFeeRecipient}. See {ERC4626-_deposit}. @@ - /// @dev Send exit fee to {_exitFeeRecipient}. See {IERC4626-_deposit}. + /// @dev Send exit fee to {_exitFeeRecipient}. See {ERC4626-_withdraw}.contracts/token/ERC20/README.adoc (1)
24-24: Tighten phrasing and align with list style (avoid parenthetical inside link).Consider inlining the cross-reference and rendering contract names monospace for consistency.
-* {ERC20Votes}: support for voting and vote delegation. xref:governance.adoc#token[See the governance guide for a minimal example (with the required overrides when combining ERC20 + ERC20Permit + ERC20Votes)]. +* {ERC20Votes}: support for voting and vote delegation; see xref:governance.adoc#token[the governance guide] for a minimal example with the required overrides when combining `ERC20`, `ERC20Permit`, and `ERC20Votes`.contracts/access/extensions/IAccessControlDefaultAdminRules.sol (1)
189-189: Minor grammar nit: use “e.g.”Prefer “e.g.” over “eg.” in parenthetical.
Apply this diff:
- * possibility of human intervention in the case of an input error (eg. set milliseconds instead of seconds). + * possibility of human intervention in the case of an input error (e.g. set milliseconds instead of seconds).contracts/mocks/TimelockReentrant.sol (1)
9-9: Visibility consistency nit.Other state vars here are
private; make_reenteredprivatefor consistency.- bool _reentered; + bool private _reentered;
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
💡 Knowledge Base configuration:
- MCP integration is disabled by default for public repositories
- Jira integration is disabled by default for public repositories
- Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories
You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.
📒 Files selected for processing (39)
README.md(1 hunks)contracts/access/extensions/AccessControlDefaultAdminRules.sol(2 hunks)contracts/access/extensions/IAccessControlDefaultAdminRules.sol(1 hunks)contracts/access/manager/AccessManager.sol(1 hunks)contracts/access/manager/IAccessManager.sol(3 hunks)contracts/account/extensions/draft-ERC7821.sol(1 hunks)contracts/account/utils/EIP7702Utils.sol(1 hunks)contracts/finance/VestingWallet.sol(1 hunks)contracts/governance/Governor.sol(1 hunks)contracts/governance/IGovernor.sol(1 hunks)contracts/governance/extensions/GovernorStorage.sol(1 hunks)contracts/governance/extensions/GovernorTimelockControl.sol(2 hunks)contracts/interfaces/IERC3156FlashLender.sol(1 hunks)contracts/metatx/ERC2771Context.sol(1 hunks)contracts/mocks/TimelockReentrant.sol(1 hunks)contracts/mocks/docs/ERC4626Fees.sol(1 hunks)contracts/token/ERC20/README.adoc(1 hunks)contracts/token/ERC721/extensions/ERC721Consecutive.sol(1 hunks)contracts/token/ERC721/utils/ERC721Utils.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/Base64.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/Bytes.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/SlotDerivation.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/Strings.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/cryptography/ECDSA.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/cryptography/README.adoc(1 hunks)contracts/utils/cryptography/draft-ERC7739Utils.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/draft-InteroperableAddress.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/math/Math.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/structs/CircularBuffer.sol(1 hunks)contracts/utils/types/Time.sol(1 hunks)docs/modules/ROOT/pages/access-control.adoc(1 hunks)docs/modules/ROOT/pages/account-abstraction.adoc(3 hunks)docs/modules/ROOT/pages/accounts.adoc(1 hunks)docs/modules/ROOT/pages/erc6909.adoc(2 hunks)docs/modules/ROOT/pages/utilities.adoc(1 hunks)scripts/generate/templates/SlotDerivation.js(1 hunks)test/account/AccountMultiSigner.test.js(1 hunks)test/governance/TimelockController.test.js(2 hunks)test/token/ERC20/ERC20.behavior.js(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
README.md
[grammar] ~69-~69: There might be a mistake here.
Context: ...ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909. * [Utilities](https://docs.openzeppelin.com...
(QB_NEW_EN)
🪛 Gitleaks (8.27.2)
test/token/ERC20/ERC20.behavior.js
81-81: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (6)
- GitHub Check: halmos
- GitHub Check: tests-upgradeable
- GitHub Check: coverage
- GitHub Check: slither
- GitHub Check: tests-foundry
- GitHub Check: tests
🔇 Additional comments (46)
contracts/utils/Base64.sol (1)
36-39: LGTM: Correct “licence” → “license”.Doc typo fix reads well; no functional impact.
contracts/finance/VestingWallet.sol (1)
109-112: Doc comment grammar fix LGTM.“has already vested” is correct here. No functional changes introduced.
contracts/mocks/docs/ERC4626Fees.sol (1)
36-36: Typo fix LGTM“withdrawal” is the correct noun; matches the style of nearby comments.
contracts/utils/cryptography/draft-ERC7739Utils.sol (1)
62-62: Typo fix looks good.Removal of the duplicated “the” improves clarity. No behavior impact.
contracts/utils/Strings.sol (1)
469-486: Explicit loop initialization improves clarity; LGTMInitializing
ito0explicitly makes intent clear and keeps style consistent with other loops in this file. No behavioral or gas impact.contracts/account/utils/EIP7702Utils.sol (1)
15-16: Typo fix LGTM.Grammar correction reads well; no functional impact.
docs/modules/ROOT/pages/access-control.adoc (1)
126-126: Grammar fix LGTM.Subject–verb agreement is correct; reads smoothly.
scripts/generate/templates/SlotDerivation.js (1)
20-21: Broadened example usage is correct.
using SlotDerivation for *;better reflects extension across types and compiles under ^0.8.20.contracts/metatx/ERC2771Context.sol (1)
11-16: Wording fix LGTM.“Rely on” is correct; clarity improved.
contracts/token/ERC721/utils/ERC721Utils.sol (1)
10-10: Doc grammar fix looks good.No functional changes; comment reads correctly.
docs/modules/ROOT/pages/erc6909.adoc (2)
3-3: Subject–verb agreement fix is correct.“are” matches the plural “goals.”
17-17: Typos corrected.“will be minted” reads correctly and improves clarity.
contracts/governance/extensions/GovernorStorage.sol (1)
9-9: Doc wording corrected.“module” singular is correct; no behavioral change.
docs/modules/ROOT/pages/utilities.adoc (1)
267-267: Spelling fix LGTM.“comparator function” is correct.
contracts/utils/draft-InteroperableAddress.sol (1)
24-24: All ERC-7930 references are consistent across the repo.No stale ERC-7390 mentions found; approving changes.
test/token/ERC20/ERC20.behavior.js (2)
81-82: Assertion chain fix is correct and consistent with chai style.
.to.be.revertedWithCustomErrorreads better and matches other tests in this file.
80-82: Ignore gitleaks false positive at this location.This is an assertion chain, not a credential. No action needed.
contracts/utils/Bytes.sol (1)
171-171: Doc wording nit fixed correctly.“Inspired by” is the proper phrasing. No code impact.
contracts/utils/math/Math.sol (1)
137-141: Ternary doc corrected to match parameters.“condition ? a : b” now aligns with the function signature. Implementation unchanged.
contracts/token/ERC721/extensions/ERC721Consecutive.sol (1)
23-24: Grammar fix reads correctly.“tokens are minted in batch” improves clarity; no behavioral change.
contracts/utils/cryptography/README.adoc (1)
4-4: Docs link updated; verify anchor resolves.The anchor
#cryptographylooks right; please confirm the rendered docs resolve to the intended section after publish.contracts/utils/types/Time.sol (1)
40-41: LGTM: grammar fix.Docstring reads correctly now (“transition happens”).
contracts/utils/cryptography/ECDSA.sol (1)
57-59: LGTM: doc readability.Blank line improves the list separation without affecting Natspec parsing.
test/account/AccountMultiSigner.test.js (2)
179-182: Assertion style update is correct.
.to.be.revertedWithCustomErrormatches chai style used elsewhere; args(2, 3)remain intact.
184-187: Consistent revert style for zero-threshold case.Switch aligns with suite-wide convention.
contracts/access/extensions/IAccessControlDefaultAdminRules.sol (1)
185-185: Typo fix LGTM."be overrode" → "be overridden" is correct.
contracts/utils/SlotDerivation.sol (1)
19-19: Doc example improvement LGTM.Using
SlotDerivation for *better reflects available overloads (bytes32, string, bytes).contracts/interfaces/IERC3156FlashLender.sol (1)
14-14: Grammar fix LGTM.“lended” → “lent” is correct.
contracts/account/extensions/draft-ERC7821.sol (1)
13-13: Duplicate word fix LGTM.“supports supports” → “supports”.
contracts/mocks/TimelockReentrant.sol (1)
15-18: Rename complete: noenableRentrancyoccurrences remain.test/governance/TimelockController.test.js (1)
421-421: ApproveenableReentrancyrename
No remainingenableRentrancycalls found in the codebase.contracts/utils/structs/CircularBuffer.sol (1)
24-24: Doc typo fix acknowledged.Removed stray asterisk; comment reads cleanly.
docs/modules/ROOT/pages/account-abstraction.adoc (3)
31-31: Improved NOTE onpreVerificationGas; LGTM.
39-39: Minor grammar tweak; LGTM.
86-86: Wording fix in Paymaster section; LGTM.contracts/access/extensions/AccessControlDefaultAdminRules.sol (3)
11-11: Use IERC165, not ERC165, for theinheritdocreference; good fix.
360-360: Comment polish; LGTM.
367-367: Comment polish; LGTM.contracts/access/manager/IAccessManager.sol (3)
126-126: Grammar fix (“event of an”); LGTM.
173-173: Pluralization fix (“operations”); LGTM.
379-379: Pluralization/wording fix; LGTM.contracts/access/manager/AccessManager.sol (1)
72-72: LGTM — grammar fix onlyComment corrected; no code or storage layout impact.
contracts/governance/IGovernor.sol (1)
337-347: LGTM — clarify “Vote starts after a delay”Docstring now reads cleanly; API and behavior unchanged.
contracts/governance/Governor.sol (1)
662-664: LGTM — doc grammar (“executes actions”)Comment fix only; no functional changes.
contracts/governance/extensions/GovernorTimelockControl.sol (2)
12-12: LGTM — doc clarity on timelock delayWording now accurately reflects that the delay applies to successful proposals.
50-54: LGTM — local variable rename to queueIdImproves readability; references updated consistently; logic unchanged.
| * - `APP_DOMAIN_SEPARATOR` is the EIP-712 {EIP712-_domainSeparatorV4} of the application smart contract that is | ||
| * requesting the signature verification (though ERC-1271). | ||
| * - `contentsHash` is the hash of the underlying data structure or message. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix preposition: “through ERC-1271”, not “though”.
Minor doc grammar issue within the bullet describing APP_DOMAIN_SEPARATOR.
Apply this diff:
- * requesting the signature verification (though ERC-1271).
+ * requesting the signature verification (through ERC-1271).📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| * - `APP_DOMAIN_SEPARATOR` is the EIP-712 {EIP712-_domainSeparatorV4} of the application smart contract that is | |
| * requesting the signature verification (though ERC-1271). | |
| * - `contentsHash` is the hash of the underlying data structure or message. | |
| * - `APP_DOMAIN_SEPARATOR` is the EIP-712 {EIP712-_domainSeparatorV4} of the application smart contract that is | |
| * requesting the signature verification (through ERC-1271). | |
| * - `contentsHash` is the hash of the underlying data structure or message. |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In contracts/utils/cryptography/draft-ERC7739Utils.sol around lines 59 to 61,
the documentation has a typo using "though ERC-1271" instead of the correct
preposition "through ERC-1271"; update the comment to read "through ERC-1271" to
fix the grammar.
| @@ -95,6 +95,6 @@ To process a bundle of `UserOperations`, bundlers call xref:api:account.adoc#Acc | |||
|
|
|||
| These rules outline the requirements for operations to be processed by the canonical mempool. | |||
|
|
|||
| Accounts can access its own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in undirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via ERC-1271) | |||
| Accounts can access their own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in indirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271])) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix extra closing parenthesis in link.
There’s an extra ) after the ERC-1271 link.
-Accounts can access their own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in indirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271]))
+Accounts can access their own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in indirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271])📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| Accounts can access their own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in indirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271])) | |
| Accounts can access their own storage during the validation phase, they might easily violate ERC-7562 storage access rules in indirect ways. For example, most accounts access their public keys from storage when validating a signature, limiting the ability of having accounts that validate operations for other accounts (e.g. via https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271]) |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In docs/modules/ROOT/pages/account-abstraction.adoc around line 98, there is an
extra closing parenthesis after the ERC-1271 link; remove the stray ')' so the
sentence ends with the link only (e.g. change "via
https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271]))" to "via
https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1271[ERC-1271]").
| @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ TIP: Given xref:api:utils/cryptography.adoc#SignerERC7913[`SignerERC7913`] provi | |||
|
|
|||
| ==== Accounts factory | |||
|
|
|||
| The first time you send an user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account. | |||
| The first time you send an user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix article usage (“a user operation”).
“User” starts with a consonant sound; use “a,” not “an.”
Apply this diff:
-The first time you send an user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account.
+The first time you send a user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account.📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| The first time you send an user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account. | |
| The first time you send a user operation, your account will be created deterministically (i.e. its code and address can be predicted) using the `initCode` field in the UserOperation. This field contains both the address of a smart contract (the factory) and the data required to call it and create your smart account. |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In docs/modules/ROOT/pages/accounts.adoc around line 36, the article before
"user operation" is incorrect ("an user operation"); change it to "a user
operation" so the sentence reads "...the first time you send a user
operation..." and update any identical occurrences in the file for consistency.
README.md
Outdated
| @@ -68,7 +66,7 @@ To keep your system secure, you should **always** use the installed code as-is, | |||
| The guides in the [documentation site](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts) will teach about different concepts, and how to use the related contracts that OpenZeppelin Contracts provides: | |||
|
|
|||
| * [Access Control](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/access-control): decide who can perform each of the actions on your system. | |||
| * [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectives, and distribute them via [Crowdsales](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/crowdsales). | |||
| * [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectives for popular ERC standards like ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Typo: “collectives” → “collectibles”.
Correct terminology for token items.
-* [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectives for popular ERC standards like ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909.
+* [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectibles for popular ERC standards like ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909.📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| * [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectives for popular ERC standards like ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909. | |
| * [Tokens](https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/tokens): create tradeable assets or collectibles for popular ERC standards like ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909. |
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~69-~69: There might be a mistake here.
Context: ...ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and ERC-6909. * [Utilities](https://docs.openzeppelin.com...
(QB_NEW_EN)
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In README.md around line 69, the word "collectives" is a typo and should be
"collectibles"; update the sentence to use "collectibles" so it reads "...create
tradeable assets or collectibles for popular ERC standards..." ensuring correct
terminology for token items.
Summary by CodeRabbit