chore(deps): bump rain-solmem 0.1.3 -> 0.1.26

[thedavidmeister]

Puts this repo on the latest published solmem, per the org-wide ruling to move everything to latest.

Changes

• foundry.toml: rain-solmem soldeer pin 0.1.3 -> 0.1.26.
• soldeer.lock: regenerated via forge soldeer install; only the rain-solmem entry moved.
• Version-pinned import paths moved from rain-solmem-0.1.3/ to rain-solmem-0.1.26/ in 4 files (1 in src/, 3 in test/): imports of LibPointer, LibBytes, LibMemCpy, LibUint256Array — all four still ship in 0.1.26.

Not changed

• No remappings to prune: this repo has no remappings.txt and relies on forge auto-remapping over dependencies/.
• No generated pointers/bytecode artifacts in this repo.
• LibStackPointer was deleted upstream in solmem; this repo never imported it.

QA

• Discriminating tests: n/a — dependency pin bump only, no behavior change in this repo; the gate is the full existing suite (118 tests, fuzz runs 2048) passing against solmem 0.1.26 locally: 118 passed, 0 failed.
• Mutations applied: n/a — the diff is a version pin, a regenerated lockfile, and import-path strings; no semantic line exists to mutate (any path mutation fails to compile).
• Oracle: the existing test suite's own assertions, unchanged by this PR, run against the new dependency version — including the differential *Slow reference tests, which exercise the bumped solmem code paths.
• Category check: task asks to move the solmem pin to 0.1.26, regenerate soldeer.lock, and move pinned import paths; all three done, nothing else touched.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores

  • Updated the underlying memory utility dependency to a newer version.
  • Refreshed related integrations to maintain compatibility with the updated dependency.

• Tests

  • Updated test components to use the refreshed dependency version.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 78fe1f5f-4e3d-4b76-9ef8-726b79822615

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b3ee41 and 33b5e57.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

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

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• foundry.toml
• src/lib/bytecode/LibBytecode.sol
• test/src/lib/bytecode/LibBytecode.sourcePointer.t.sol
• test/src/lib/bytecode/LibBytecodeSlow.sol
• test/src/lib/caller/LibContextSlow.sol

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR updates the rain-solmem dependency from version 0.1.3 to version 0.1.26 in project configuration, production imports, and test-support imports.

Changes

rain-solmem Version Update

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Update dependency references foundry.toml, src/lib/bytecode/LibBytecode.sol, test/src/lib/bytecode/*, test/src/lib/caller/LibContextSlow.sol	The dependency declaration and all listed Solidity imports now reference rain-solmem version 0.1.26. Library logic and public declarations are unchanged.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk:⚪ Minimal · up to 33b5e

This PR updates the solmem dependency and its pinned import paths without changing repository behavior; no actionable merge-blocking risk remains after normal checks and review.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the dependency update from rain-solmem 0.1.3 to 0.1.26.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (5 skipped: 5 unsupported.)
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch 2026-08-22-solmem-0-1-26

---

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

[coderabbitai]

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bashset -euo pipefail
base_ref="$(git merge-base HEAD origin/main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || true)"if [ -z"$base_ref" ];thenecho"Could not determine the PR base reference."exit 1
fiecho"BASE=$base_ref"
git diff --stat "$base_ref"...HEAD
echo
git diff --name-status "$base_ref"...HEAD
echo
git diff --unified=3 "$base_ref"...HEAD

Length of output: 565

---

SIZE=S

_{You are interacting with an AI system.}