Bump rainlang-interface 0.2.8 -> 0.2.9 and rain-sol-codegen 0.1.0 -> 0.1.37

[thedavidmeister]

What

Bump rainlang-interface 0.2.8 -> 0.2.9 and rain-sol-codegen 0.1.0 -> 0.1.37 in foundry.toml, refresh soldeer.lock and remappings.txt, and rewrite every versioned rainlang-interface import path under src.

Why

The org health dashboard flags the pins as stale. rainlang-interface 0.2.9 is the release built against rain-sol-codegen 0.1.37, and soldeer keeps one version per package with no aliasing, so raindex (whose rainlang 0.2.6 imports rainlang-interface 0.2.9 while raindex-interface 0.1.6 imports 0.2.8) cannot take the new codegen until raindex-interface is on 0.2.9. This PR unblocks that.

QA

• Discriminating tests: n/a, pure pin bump with no logic changed; forge build --deny warnings and forge test run locally.
• Mutations applied: n/a, no logic changed.
• Oracle: soldeer registry latest revisions (rainlang-interface 0.2.9, rain-sol-codegen 0.1.37); git diff scope is foundry.toml, soldeer.lock, remappings.txt and the src import paths.
• Category check: dependency pin bump, no interface, type or behaviour change.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01V8ViHcKLVk2YoS2joH4HdN

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated Rainlang interface dependencies to version 0.2.9.
  • Updated Rain Solidity code generation tooling to version 0.1.37.
  • Refreshed related interface references to maintain compatibility with the updated packages.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: d1371d5f-4275-46b2-bcee-14b4fa9e016d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f261cb2 and 4e16da9.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

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

📒 Files selected for processing (8)

• foundry.toml
• remappings.txt
• src/interface/IRaindexV6.sol
• src/interface/deprecated/v1/IOrderBookV1.sol
• src/interface/deprecated/v2/IOrderBookV2.sol
• src/interface/deprecated/v3/IOrderBookV3.sol
• src/interface/deprecated/v4/IOrderBookV4.sol
• src/interface/deprecated/v5/IOrderBookV5.sol

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

---

Walkthrough

The change updates rainlang-interface and rain-sol-codegen dependency versions, remappings, and related Solidity import paths. No public declarations or interface definitions changed.

Changes

Dependency alignment

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Dependency versions and remappings foundry.toml, remappings.txt	rainlang-interface was updated from 0.2.8 to 0.2.9. rain-sol-codegen was updated from 0.1.0 to 0.1.37.
Interface import updates src/interface/IRaindexV6.sol, src/interface/deprecated/v1/IOrderBookV1.sol, src/interface/deprecated/v2/IOrderBookV2.sol, src/interface/deprecated/v3/IOrderBookV3.sol, src/interface/deprecated/v4/IOrderBookV4.sol, src/interface/deprecated/v5/IOrderBookV5.sol	Updated Rainlang interface imports to resolve from version 0.2.9.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes

Change: Other

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 4e16d

This change aligns dependencies and imports without changing interface declarations or runtime logic, so it is ready to merge subject to normal checks.

🚥 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 identifies both dependency version updates, which are the main changes in the pull request.
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…
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 2026-09-14-codegen-0-1-37

---

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