From c6c399c740344686d6c86784cf915f0a5c7caaf6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: bader y <ibnbassem@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 12:15:37 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Update
 developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs

Co-authored-by: Juan Girini <juangirini@gmail.com>
---
 developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs b/developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs
index 09fdf508dcfe..46db2971d200 100644
--- a/developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs
+++ b/developer-hub/src/reference_docs/safe_defensive_programming.rs
@@ -273,7 +273,7 @@
 //!   <summary><b>Solution: Saturating</b></summary>
 //!   For Alice's balance problem, using `saturated_sub` could've mitigated this issue.  As debt or
 //!   having a negative balance is not a concept within blockchains, a saturating calculation
-//! would've   simply limited her balance to the lower bound of u32.
+//! would've simply limited her balance to the lower bound of u32.
 //!
 //!   In other words: Alice's balance would've stayed at "0", even after being slashed.
 //!