Clarify loop exit condition in subtree inclusion proof verification - #145
Merged
Conversation
davidben
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2025
davidben
left a comment
davidben
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I considered suggesting we add an explanatory sentence to “This is the same as the procedure […]” because it’s now not as obvious, but it seemed awkward so… meh.
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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Entering the loop, either
LSB(fn)is already set, orfnis equal tosnwhich is non-zero. Thus, the right-shifting loop will only ever exit due toLSB(fn)being set.