Fix typos

TODO.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 - Lev's trick to skip some low-level modular reduction
 - Sumcheck, case z = 0, no need to fold, only keep first half of the values (done in PR 33 by Lambda) (and also in WHIR?)
 - Custom AVX2 / AVX512 / Neon implem in Plonky3 for all of the finite field operations (done for degree 4 extension, but not degree 5)
-- Many times, we evaluate different multilinear polynomials (diferent columns of the same table etc) at a common point. OPTI = compute the eq(.) once, and then dot_product with everything
+- Many times, we evaluate different multilinear polynomials (different columns of the same table etc) at a common point. OPTI = compute the eq(.) once, and then dot_product with everything
 - To commit to multiple AIR table using 1 single pcs, the most general form our "packed pcs" api should accept is:
  a list of n (n not a power of 2) columns, each ending with m repeated values (in this manner we can reduce proof size when they are a lot of columns (poseidons ...))
 - in the runner of leanISA program, if we call 2 times the same function with the same arguments, we can reuse the same memory frame
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ But we reduce proof size a lot using instead (TODO):
 - About range checks, that can currently be done in 3 cycles (see 2.5.3 of the zkVM pdf), in the instruction encoding of DEREF, if we replaced (1 - AUX) by a dedicated column,
   we could allow DEREFS that 'does not do anything with the resulting value', which is exactly what we want for range check: we only want to ensure that m[m[fp + x]] (resp m[(t-1) - m[fp + x]])
   is a valid memory access (i.e. the index is < M the memory size), but currently the DEREF instruction forces us to 'store' the result, in m[fp + i] (resp m[fp + k]).
-  TLDR: adding a new encoding field for DEREF would save 2 memory cells / range check. If this can also increase perf in alternative scenario (other instructions for isntance),
+  TLDR: adding a new encoding field for DEREF would save 2 memory cells / range check. If this can also increase perf in alternative scenario (other instructions for instance),
   potentially we should consider it.
 
 ## Known leanISA compiler bugs:

crates/lean_prover/src/common.rs

@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ pub fn fold_bytecode(bytecode: &Bytecode, folding_challenges: &MultilinearPoint<
     fold_multilinear_chunks(&encoded_bytecode, folding_challenges)
 }
 
-pub fn intitial_and_final_pc_conditions(
+pub fn initial_and_final_pc_conditions(
     bytecode: &Bytecode,
     log_n_cycles: usize,
 ) -> (Evaluation<EF>, Evaluation<EF>) {
@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ pub fn add_memory_statements_for_dot_product_precompile(
             return Err(ProofError::InvalidProof);
         }
         if entry.n_vars() >= log_public_memory {
-            todo!("vm multilinear eval accross multiple memory chunks")
+            todo!("vm multilinear eval across multiple memory chunks")
         }
         let addr_bits = to_big_endian_in_field(entry.addr_coeffs, log_memory - entry.n_vars());
         let statement = Evaluation::new([addr_bits, entry.point.clone()].concat(), entry.res);
@@ -418,8 +418,8 @@ pub fn add_poseidon_lookup_statements_on_indexes(
     log_n_p24: usize,
     index_lookup_point: &MultilinearPoint<EF>,
     inner_values: &[EF],
-    p16_indexe_statements: [&mut Vec<Evaluation<EF>>; 4], // a, b, res_1, res_2
-    p24_indexe_statements: [&mut Vec<Evaluation<EF>>; 3], // a, b, res
+    p16_index_statements: [&mut Vec<Evaluation<EF>>; 4], // a, b, res_1, res_2
+    p24_index_statements: [&mut Vec<Evaluation<EF>>; 3], // a, b, res
 ) {
     assert_eq!(inner_values.len(), 7);
     let mut idx_point_right_p16 = MultilinearPoint(index_lookup_point[3..].to_vec());
@@ -428,13 +428,13 @@ pub fn add_poseidon_lookup_statements_on_indexes(
     if log_n_p16 < log_n_p24 {
         std::mem::swap(&mut idx_point_right_p16, &mut idx_point_right_p24);
     }
-    for (i, stmt) in p16_indexe_statements.into_iter().enumerate() {
+    for (i, stmt) in p16_index_statements.into_iter().enumerate() {
         stmt.push(Evaluation::new(
             idx_point_right_p16.clone(),
             inner_values[i],
         ));
     }
-    for (i, stmt) in p24_indexe_statements.into_iter().enumerate() {
+    for (i, stmt) in p24_index_statements.into_iter().enumerate() {
         stmt.push(Evaluation::new(
             idx_point_right_p24.clone(),
             inner_values[i + 4],

crates/lean_prover/src/prove_execution.rs

@@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ pub fn prove_execution(
                     .iter()
                     .map(|c| c.as_slice())
                     .collect::<Vec<_>>(),
-            ), // we do not use packing here beacause it's slower in practice (this sumcheck is small)
+            ), // we do not use packing here because it's slower in practice (this sumcheck is small)
             &dot_product_footprint_computation,
             &dot_product_footprint_computation,
             &[],
@@ -937,7 +937,7 @@ pub fn prove_execution(
     }
 
     let (initial_pc_statement, final_pc_statement) =
-        intitial_and_final_pc_conditions(bytecode, log_n_cycles);
+        initial_and_final_pc_conditions(bytecode, log_n_cycles);
 
     let dot_product_computation_column_evals = dot_product_computations_base
         .par_iter()
@@ -1073,17 +1073,17 @@ pub fn prove_execution(
                 dot_product_air_statement(2),
                 dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_a,
                 grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_a,
-            ], // dot product: indexe a
+            ], // dot product: index a
             vec![
                 dot_product_air_statement(3),
                 dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_b,
                 grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_b,
-            ], // dot product: indexe b
+            ], // dot product: index b
             vec![
                 dot_product_air_statement(4),
                 dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_res,
                 grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_res,
-            ], // dot product: indexe res
+            ], // dot product: index res
         ],
         dot_product_computation_column_statements,
     ]

crates/lean_prover/src/verify_execution.rs

@@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ pub fn verify_execution(
     }
 
     let (initial_pc_statement, final_pc_statement) =
-        intitial_and_final_pc_conditions(bytecode, log_n_cycles);
+        initial_and_final_pc_conditions(bytecode, log_n_cycles);
 
     let dot_product_computation_column_evals =
         verifier_state.next_extension_scalars_const::<DIMENSION>()?;
@@ -780,17 +780,17 @@ pub fn verify_execution(
                     dot_product_air_statement(2),
                     dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_a,
                     grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_a,
-                ], // dot product: indexe a
+                ], // dot product: index a
                 vec![
                     dot_product_air_statement(3),
                     dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_b,
                     grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_b,
-                ], // dot product: indexe b
+                ], // dot product: index b
                 vec![
                     dot_product_air_statement(4),
                     dot_product_logup_star_indexes_statement_res,
                     grand_product_dot_product_table_indexes_statement_index_res,
-                ], // dot product: indexe res
+                ], // dot product: index res
             ],
             dot_product_computation_column_statements,
         ]