Bump rain-math-saturating to 0.1.10

[thedavidmeister]

Bumps rain-math-saturating from 0.1.2 to 0.1.10, the current registry head, in the four places the pin lives: foundry.toml [dependencies], remappings.txt, soldeer.lock (re-resolved with forge soldeer update) and the versioned import in test/lib/LibFixedPointDecimalScaleSlow.sol. Every revision between 0.1.2 and 0.1.10 came from rainlanguage/rain.math.saturating's 2026-09-04 audit and its fixes: README and REUSE.toml edits and a one-word NatSpec typo fix in LibSaturatingMath.sol. The three library functions are byte-for-byte unchanged in behaviour, so this is a pin refresh with no semantic change for saturatingMul as used here.

QA

• Discriminating tests: n/a - dependency pin bump; the library's saturating predicates are unchanged between 0.1.2 and 0.1.10 (only NatSpec, README and REUSE.toml differ in the published zips). Full suite run locally in the nix sol-shell after the bump; forge fmt --check clean; reuse lint compliant.
• Mutations applied: n/a - no first-party code changed.
• Oracle: forge soldeer install from the rewritten lock resolves exactly one dependencies/rain-math-saturating-0.1.10/; the stale -0.1.2/ remapping line that soldeer update appends beside the new one was removed by hand so a single remapping remains.
• Category check: the request names the stale rain-math-saturating dependency only; forge-std, @openzeppelin-contracts and rain-string pins are untouched.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_018ybHANeKe4TePBcFzz89ML

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated the rain-math-saturating dependency to version 0.1.10.
  • Updated related package references to maintain compatibility with the newer dependency version.

[coderabbitai]

Note

Currently processing new changes in this PR. This may take a few minutes, please wait...

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Team

Run ID: 2f2f8679-2036-4966-9adf-60334bca4e46

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7f9ff71 and 2f032ba.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

• soldeer.lock is excluded by !**/*.lock

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• foundry.toml
• remappings.txt
• test/lib/LibFixedPointDecimalScaleSlow.sol

 _________________________________________________________________________________________________
< I reached into your code and found nothing there to ease the pressure on my ever-worrying mind. >
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  \
   \   \
        \ /\
        ( )
      .( o ).

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch bump-rain-math-saturating-0.1.10

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

@coderabbitai assess this PR size classification for the totality of the PR with the following criterias and report it in your comment:

S/M/L PR Classification Guidelines:

This guide helps classify merged pull requests by effort and complexity rather than just line count. The goal is to assess the difficulty and scope of changes after they have been completed.

Small (S)

Characteristics:

• Simple bug fixes, typos, or minor refactoring
• Single-purpose changes affecting 1-2 files
• Documentation updates
• Configuration tweaks
• Changes that require minimal context to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 5-10 minutes

Examples:

• Fix typo in variable name
• Update README with new instructions
• Adjust configuration values
• Simple one-line bug fixes
• Import statement cleanup

Medium (M)

Characteristics:

• Feature additions or enhancements
• Refactoring that touches multiple files but maintains existing behavior
• Breaking changes with backward compatibility
• Changes requiring some domain knowledge to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 15-30 minutes

Examples:

• Add new feature or component
• Refactor common utility functions
• Update dependencies with minor breaking changes
• Add new component with tests
• Performance optimizations
• More complex bug fixes

Large (L)

Characteristics:

• Major feature implementations
• Breaking changes or API redesigns
• Complex refactoring across multiple modules
• New architectural patterns or significant design changes
• Changes requiring deep context and multiple review rounds

Review Effort: Would have taken 45+ minutes

Examples:

• Complete new feature with frontend/backend changes
• Protocol upgrades or breaking changes
• Major architectural refactoring
• Framework or technology upgrades

Additional Factors to Consider

When deciding between sizes, also consider:

• Test coverage impact: More comprehensive test changes lean toward larger classification
• Risk level: Changes to critical systems bump up a size category
• Team familiarity: Novel patterns or technologies increase complexity

Notes:

• the assessment must be for the totality of the PR, that means comparing the base branch to the last commit of the PR
• the assessment output must be exactly one of: S, M or L (single-line comment) in format of: SIZE={S/M/L}
• do not include any additional text, only the size classification
• your assessment comment must not include tips or additional sections
• do NOT tag me or anyone else on your comment