Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Saturating Nat subtraction always trips us, so I'm in support of this. What's up with take vs truncate? |
Collaborator
Author
|
They're the same function, just |
protz
approved these changes
Apr 21, 2026
Collaborator
protz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the consistency. Good for me 👍
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
UInt64.toInt returns a non-negative number
BitVec.toInt returns may return a negative number
BitVec.toNat returns a Nat which has saturating subtraction
Let's stick with the Rocq convention of .unsigned and .signed for fixed-width variables, both returning Int
h/t @miriampolzer for asking me about this code