author: "qodo-merge-pro"
---

author: "qodo-merge-pro"
---

---
crq: "CRQ-36"
messageId: "001"
timestamp: "2025-09-11T19:02:51Z"
author: "coderabbitai"
---

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: summarize by coderabbit.ai -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: rate limited by coderabbit.ai -->

> [!WARNING]
> ## Rate limit exceeded
> 
> @jmikedupont2 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait **29 minutes and 55 seconds** before requesting another review.
> 
> <details>
> <summary>⌛ How to resolve this issue?</summary>
> 
> After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the `@coderabbitai review` command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.
> 
> We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.
> 
> </details>
> 
> 
> <details>
> <summary>🚦 How do rate limits work?</summary>
> 
> CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.
> 
> Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.
> 
> Please see our [FAQ](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/faq) for further information.
> 
> </details>
> 
> <details>
> <summary>📥 Commits</summary>
> 
> Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 259f61c12260f34550a17f8441450fa3e1d91596 and 8e681dfd61e6fc69c495ac09701fa3472ba4d5b3.
> 
> </details>
> 
> <details>
> <summary>📒 Files selected for processing (1)</summary>
> 
> * `task.md` (1 hunks)
> 
> </details>

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: rate limited by coderabbit.ai -->
<!-- finishing_touch_checkbox_start -->

<details>
<summary>✨ Finishing touches</summary>

<details>
<summary>🧪 Generate unit tests</summary>

- [ ] <!-- {"checkboxId": "f47ac10b-58cc-4372-a567-0e02b2c3d479", "radioGroupId": "utg-output-choice-group-3283020703"} -->   Create PR with unit tests
- [ ] <!-- {"checkboxId": "07f1e7d6-8a8e-4e23-9900-8731c2c87f58", "radioGroupId": "utg-output-choice-group-3283020703"} -->   Post copyable unit tests in a comment
- [ ] <!-- {"checkboxId": "6ba7b810-9dad-11d1-80b4-00c04fd430c8", "radioGroupId": "utg-output-choice-group-3283020703"} -->   Commit unit tests in branch `feature/crq-36-crq-005-strategic-alignment`

</details>

</details>

<!-- finishing_touch_checkbox_end -->
<!-- tips_start -->

---

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.

<details>
<summary>❤️ Share</summary>

- [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai)
- [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai)
- [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai)
- [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code)

</details>

<sub>Comment `@coderabbitai help` to get the list of available commands and usage tips.</sub>

<!-- tips_end -->

// Multiple, duplicated, and sometimes invalid type definitions exist
// e.g., in generated_lattice_code/value_type.rs (invalid)
impl ValueType {
    pub fn count(&self) -> u8 {
        match self { ValueType::Bit, ... } // Missing return values
    }
    pub fn zos_sequence() -> Vec<ValueType> {
        vec![ValueType::PrimeValue7, ...] // Invalid construction
    }
}

// e.g., in src/lib.rs (runtime panic)
pub fn build_zos_lattice() -> Lattice {
    // Layer is for `bool` but initialized with `ThreeValue` type enum.
    let mut crq_layer = LatticeLayer::<bool>::new(ValueType::ThreeValue);
    ...
    let instance = Instance::<bool>::new(...);
    // This will panic due to type mismatch inside `add_instance`.
    crq_layer.add_instance(instance);
    ...
}

// A single, correct source of truth for types, likely generated at build time
// e.g., in a central types crate
pub enum ValueType { Bit, ThreeValue, ... }
impl ValueType {
    pub fn count(&self) -> u8 {
        match self { ValueType::Bit => 2, ... } // Correctly returns values
    }
}
pub struct LatticeLayer<T> { ... }
impl<T> LatticeLayer<T> {
    // Constructor ensures type consistency
    pub fn new(value_type: ValueType) -> Self { ... }
    pub fn add_instance(&mut self, instance: Instance<T>) { ... }
}

// e.g., in src/lib.rs (type-safe)
pub fn build_zos_lattice() -> Lattice {
    // Layer is correctly typed for `ThreeValueUnit`
    let mut crq_layer = LatticeLayer::<ThreeValueUnit>::new(ValueType::ThreeValue);
    ...
    let instance = Instance::<ThreeValueUnit>::new(...);
    // This is now type-safe.
    crq_layer.add_instance(instance);
    ...
}