chore: continue with miden-base update (`3154a3`) by juan518munoz · Pull Request #1815 · 0xMiden/miden-client

juan518munoz · 2026-02-20T21:33:40Z

Continue with node & base update to update the miden-base dependency to commit 0904e2c61.

Note:

Before merge, we should decide whether to use the new testing remote prover approach
or expose the previously used structs again.

juan518munoz · 2026-02-26T20:45:38Z

crates/rust-client/src/rpc/domain/sync.rs

-/// Represents a `proto::rpc::SyncStateResponse` with fields converted into domain types.
+/// Represents the composed result of `sync_notes`, `sync_chain_mmr`, and `sync_transactions`
+/// with fields converted into domain types.
 pub struct StateSyncInfo {


Maybe we should move this elsewhere as it's no longer part of the domain

Agree, maybe into crates/rust-client/src/sync/state_sync.rs since it's only used there.

I think we should keep this at the rpc module level (ie move it up one more mod)

SantiagoPittella · 2026-02-27T15:25:23Z

bin/integration-tests/src/tests/fpi.rs

+                # inputs are passed as foreign_procedure_inputs:
+                # [slot_id_prefix, slot_id_suffix, KEY, pad(10)]
+                exec.active_account::get_map_item


Should we still push the storage slot here? Why was this changed to assumed inputs?

I think both approaches test effectively the same, so no need to change it necessarily, but yeah not sure why this was generalized (now you can query any slot)

SantiagoPittella · 2026-02-27T15:40:17Z

CHANGELOG.md


 ### Changes

+* [BREAKING] Incremented MSRV to 1.91.


Lets add the API changes for the rpc trait

SantiagoPittella · 2026-02-27T15:44:19Z

crates/testing/prover/src/main.rs

+struct StatusService;
+
+#[async_trait::async_trait]
+impl worker_status_api_server::WorkerStatusApi for StatusService {
+    async fn status(
+        &self,
+        _: tonic::Request<()>,
+    ) -> Result<tonic::Response<proto::WorkerStatus>, tonic::Status> {
+        Ok(tonic::Response::new(proto::WorkerStatus {
+            version: env!("CARGO_PKG_VERSION").to_string(),
+            supported_proof_type: proto::ProofType::Transaction as i32,
+        }))
+    }
+}


Do we need to implement this? Maybe we can remove the status service if we don't use it.

TomasArrachea · 2026-02-27T16:28:56Z

crates/web-client/src/models/account_component.rs

+    pub fn with_supports_all_types(self) -> Self {
+        let metadata = self.0.metadata().clone().with_supports_all_types();
+        let code = self.0.component_code().clone();
+        let slots = self.0.storage_slots().to_vec();
+        AccountComponent(
+            NativeAccountComponent::new(code, slots, metadata)
+                .expect("reconstructing component with updated metadata should not fail"),
+        )


This method was removed from the AccountComponent struct so maybe we should remove it here as well, instead of working around it.

Yes, let's remove this

TomasArrachea · 2026-02-27T18:37:03Z

crates/rust-client/src/sync/state_sync.rs

+/// highest `block_num`. This replicates the old `SyncState` behavior where the node returned
+/// the latest account commitment per account in the synced range.
+fn derive_account_commitment_updates(


Maybe rename this to something like derive_latest_commitments()? Also, I'd rather not reference the "old" implementation in the comments.

igamigo

LGTM! Good work. We can address the remaining comments once we merge this to the base branch

igamigo · 2026-03-02T20:33:20Z

bin/integration-tests/src/tests/fpi.rs

+                # inputs are passed as foreign_procedure_inputs:
+                # [slot_id_prefix, slot_id_suffix, KEY, pad(10)]
+                exec.active_account::get_map_item


I think both approaches test effectively the same, so no need to change it necessarily, but yeah not sure why this was generalized (now you can query any slot)

igamigo · 2026-03-02T20:35:11Z

crates/rust-client/src/rpc/domain/sync.rs

-/// Represents a `proto::rpc::SyncStateResponse` with fields converted into domain types.
+/// Represents the composed result of `sync_notes`, `sync_chain_mmr`, and `sync_transactions`
+/// with fields converted into domain types.
 pub struct StateSyncInfo {


I think we should keep this at the rpc module level (ie move it up one more mod)

igamigo · 2026-03-02T20:43:57Z

crates/rust-client/src/sync/state_sync_update.rs

+        // Fallback for transactions with unauthenticated input notes: the node
+        // authenticates these notes during processing, which changes the transaction
+        // ID. Match by account ID and pre-transaction state instead.
+        if let Some(transaction) = self.transactions.values_mut().find(|tx| {
+            tx.details.account_id == transaction_inclusion.account_id
+                && tx.details.init_account_state == transaction_inclusion.initial_state_commitment
+        }) {
+            transaction.commit_transaction(transaction_inclusion.block_num, timestamp);


Not entirely sure we would need this, but I'll need to investigate more

igamigo · 2026-03-02T20:44:28Z

crates/web-client/src/models/account_component.rs

+    pub fn with_supports_all_types(self) -> Self {
+        let metadata = self.0.metadata().clone().with_supports_all_types();
+        let code = self.0.component_code().clone();
+        let slots = self.0.storage_slots().to_vec();
+        AccountComponent(
+            NativeAccountComponent::new(code, slots, metadata)
+                .expect("reconstructing component with updated metadata should not fail"),
+        )


Yes, let's remove this

juan518munoz changed the title ~~chore: continue with miden-base update~~ chore: continue with miden-base update (0904e2c61) Feb 25, 2026

juan518munoz added this to the v0.14 milestone Feb 26, 2026

juan518munoz added the no changelog This PR does not require an entry in the `CHANGELOG.md` file label Feb 26, 2026

juan518munoz force-pushed the jmunoz-migrate-to-next-base branch from a58d2f5 to bd0859a Compare February 26, 2026 18:56

chore: continue with update

6c10836

juan518munoz force-pushed the jmunoz-migrate-to-next-base branch from 0d25a9a to 6c10836 Compare February 26, 2026 21:36

juan518munoz commented Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

juan518munoz marked this pull request as ready for review February 26, 2026 21:40

juan518munoz requested review from Fumuran, JereSalo, SantiagoPittella, TomasArrachea and igamigo February 26, 2026 21:41

chore: update rust-version

957fda7

SantiagoPittella reviewed Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

CHANGELOG.md

### Changes

* [BREAKING] Incremented MSRV to 1.91.

Copy link

Collaborator

SantiagoPittella Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lets add the API changes for the rpc trait

SantiagoPittella reviewed Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

TomasArrachea reviewed Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

chore: bump base version to 3154a3

0b37841

juan518munoz changed the title ~~chore: continue with miden-base update (0904e2c61)~~ chore: continue with miden-base update (3154a3) Mar 2, 2026

juan518munoz added 3 commits March 2, 2026 16:36

fix: react-sdk changes

f51d991

ci: fix

a28bddd

fix: react-sdk-tests

5884990

igamigo approved these changes Mar 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix: react-sdk integration tests

7ae2e29

juan518munoz merged commit 51ac780 into andrew-migrate-to-next-base Mar 2, 2026
29 checks passed

juan518munoz deleted the jmunoz-migrate-to-next-base branch March 2, 2026 22:22

Conversation

juan518munoz commented Feb 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

igamigo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

juan518munoz commented Feb 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading