Support RPC 0.8.0 #220
Draft
Support RPC 0.8.0 #220
+441
−164
Conversation
This file contains 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
DelevoXDG
reviewed
Oct 28, 2024
Sources/Starknet/Data/StorageProof/NodeHashToNodeMappingItem.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Sources/Starknet/Data/StorageProof/NodeHashToNodeMappingItem.swift
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Maksim Zdobnikau <[email protected]>
DelevoXDG
reviewed
Nov 4, 2024
Comment on lines
+8
to
+28
| let binaryNodeKeys = Set(BinaryNode.CodingKeys.allCases.map(\.stringValue)) | ||
| let edgeNodeKeys = Set(EdgeNode.CodingKeys.allCases.map(\.stringValue)) | ||
|
|
||
| let binaryNodeContainer = try decoder.container(keyedBy: BinaryNode.CodingKeys.self) | ||
|
|
||
| if Set(binaryNodeContainer.allKeys.map(\.stringValue)) == binaryNodeKeys { | ||
| let binaryNode = try BinaryNode(from: decoder) | ||
| self = .binaryNode(binaryNode) | ||
| } else if let edgeNodeContainer = try? decoder.container(keyedBy: EdgeNode.CodingKeys.self), | ||
| Set(edgeNodeContainer.allKeys.map(\.stringValue)) == edgeNodeKeys | ||
| { | ||
| let edgeNode = try EdgeNode(from: decoder) | ||
| self = .edgeNode(edgeNode) | ||
| } else { | ||
| let context = DecodingError.Context( | ||
| codingPath: decoder.codingPath, | ||
| // TODO: Improve error message. | ||
| debugDescription: "Failed to decode MerkleNode from the given data." | ||
| ) | ||
| throw DecodingError.dataCorrupted(context) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems to me this is slightly overcomplicated:
Suggested change
| let binaryNodeKeys = Set(BinaryNode.CodingKeys.allCases.map(\.stringValue)) | |
| let edgeNodeKeys = Set(EdgeNode.CodingKeys.allCases.map(\.stringValue)) | |
| let binaryNodeContainer = try decoder.container(keyedBy: BinaryNode.CodingKeys.self) | |
| if Set(binaryNodeContainer.allKeys.map(\.stringValue)) == binaryNodeKeys { | |
| let binaryNode = try BinaryNode(from: decoder) | |
| self = .binaryNode(binaryNode) | |
| } else if let edgeNodeContainer = try? decoder.container(keyedBy: EdgeNode.CodingKeys.self), | |
| Set(edgeNodeContainer.allKeys.map(\.stringValue)) == edgeNodeKeys | |
| { | |
| let edgeNode = try EdgeNode(from: decoder) | |
| self = .edgeNode(edgeNode) | |
| } else { | |
| let context = DecodingError.Context( | |
| codingPath: decoder.codingPath, | |
| // TODO: Improve error message. | |
| debugDescription: "Failed to decode MerkleNode from the given data." | |
| ) | |
| throw DecodingError.dataCorrupted(context) | |
| } | |
| if let binaryNode = try? BinaryNode(from: decoder) { | |
| self = .binaryNode(binaryNode) | |
| } else if let edgeNode = try? EdgeNode(from: decoder) { | |
| self = .edgeNode(edgeNode) | |
| } else { | |
| throw DecodingError.dataCorrupted(DecodingError.Context(codingPath: decoder.codingPath, debugDescription: "Failed to decode MerkleNode.")) | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And while the spec is not merged yet, do you think maybe it's worth it to reach out to starknet-specs maintainers and ask "type" field to be added? "Type" fields are used heavily in the spec overall, so this might be a reasonable ask.
Comment on lines
+42
to
+51
| public static func == (lhs: MerkleNode, rhs: MerkleNode) -> Bool { | ||
| switch (lhs, rhs) { | ||
| case let (.binaryNode(lhsBinaryNode), .binaryNode(rhsBinaryNode)): | ||
| lhsBinaryNode == rhsBinaryNode | ||
| case let (.edgeNode(lhsEdgeNode), .edgeNode(rhsEdgeNode)): | ||
| lhsEdgeNode == rhsEdgeNode | ||
| default: | ||
| false | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This shouldn't be necessary? 🤔
The advantage of the enum approach is that Equatable conformance should be synthesized automatically.
Suggested change
| public static func == (lhs: MerkleNode, rhs: MerkleNode) -> Bool { | |
| switch (lhs, rhs) { | |
| case let (.binaryNode(lhsBinaryNode), .binaryNode(rhsBinaryNode)): | |
| lhsBinaryNode == rhsBinaryNode | |
| case let (.edgeNode(lhsEdgeNode), .edgeNode(rhsEdgeNode)): | |
| lhsEdgeNode == rhsEdgeNode | |
| default: | |
| false | |
| } | |
| } |
|
|
||
| let node = try decoder.decode(MerkleNode.self, from: json) | ||
| if case let .edgeNode(edgeNode) = node { | ||
| XCTAssertEqual(edgeNode.path, 123) |
Comment on lines
+10
to
+15
| public init(from decoder: Decoder) throws { | ||
| let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self) | ||
| nodes = try container.decode(NodeHashToNodeMapping.self, forKey: .nodes) | ||
| contractLeavesData = try container.decode([ContractLeafData].self, forKey: .contractLeavesData) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| public init(from decoder: Decoder) throws { | |
| let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self) | |
| nodes = try container.decode(NodeHashToNodeMapping.self, forKey: .nodes) | |
| contractLeavesData = try container.decode([ContractLeafData].self, forKey: .contractLeavesData) | |
| } |
Comment on lines
+16
to
+19
| public static func == (lhs: ContractsProof, rhs: ContractsProof) -> Bool { | ||
| lhs.nodes == rhs.nodes && lhs.contractLeavesData == rhs.contractLeavesData | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| public static func == (lhs: ContractsProof, rhs: ContractsProof) -> Bool { | |
| lhs.nodes == rhs.nodes && lhs.contractLeavesData == rhs.contractLeavesData | |
| } |
Comment on lines
+11
to
+21
|
|
||
| public init(from decoder: Decoder) throws { | ||
| let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self) | ||
|
|
||
| nodeHash = try container.decode(Felt.self, forKey: .nodeHash) | ||
| node = try container.decode(MerkleNode.self, forKey: .node) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public static func == (lhs: NodeHashToNodeMappingItem, rhs: NodeHashToNodeMappingItem) -> Bool { | ||
| lhs.nodeHash == rhs.nodeHash && lhs.node == rhs.node | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| public init(from decoder: Decoder) throws { | |
| let container = try decoder.container(keyedBy: CodingKeys.self) | |
| nodeHash = try container.decode(Felt.self, forKey: .nodeHash) | |
| node = try container.decode(MerkleNode.self, forKey: .node) | |
| } | |
| public static func == (lhs: NodeHashToNodeMappingItem, rhs: NodeHashToNodeMappingItem) -> Bool { | |
| lhs.nodeHash == rhs.nodeHash && lhs.node == rhs.node | |
| } |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Describe your changes
Add support for RPC 0.8.0
starknet_getStorageProofStarknetGetStorageProofResponse,GlobalRoots,ContractsProof,ContractLeafData,NodeHashToNodeMappingItem,BinaryNode,EdgeNode,ContractStorageKeystructsgetStorageProofmethod inStarknetRequeststarknet_getMessagesStatusMessageStatusstructgetMessagesStatusmethod inStarknetRequestStarknetAccountProtocol:signDeployAccountV3has nowresourceBoundsparam instead ofl1ResourceBoundsStarknetInvokeParamsV3,StarknetDeployAccountParamsV3,StarknetOptionalInvokeParamsV3:l1ResourceBoundsparam toresourceBoundsin constructorsStarknetFeeEstimate:gasConsumedtol1GasConsumedgasPricetol1GasPricedataGasPricetol1DataGasPricedataGasConsumedtol1DataGasConsumedl2GasConsumed,l2GasPricefieldsStarknetResourcesprotocol to have onlyl1Gasandl2GasfieldsStarknetExecutionResourcesfieldsStarknetDataAvailabilityandStarknetComputationResourcesStarknetInnerCallExecutionResourcesl1GasinStarknetResourceBoundsMappingcomputationResourcestoexecutionResourcesinStarknetFunctionInvocationand change its type toStarknetInnerCallExecutionResourcesinstead ofStarknetComputationResourcesfailureReasontoStarknetGetTransactionStatusResponseLinked issues
Closes #219
Breaking changes
resourceBoundsinstead ofl1ResourceBoundsparamStarknetComputationResourceshas been removed;StarknetExecutionResourcesandStarknetFeeEstimatehave been updated