Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

feat!: improve () and Option<T> type handling #2777

Merged
merged 54 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024
Merged

feat!: improve () and Option<T> type handling #2777

merged 54 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024

Conversation

petertonysmith94
Copy link
Contributor

@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 commented Jul 16, 2024 •
edited by arboleya
Loading

Release notes

In this release, we:

  • Improved the type handling for () and Option<T> types

Summary

  • Our types for functions are now like for like against their Sway counterparts.
  • Made the Option<T> property optional.
  • Added the VoidCoder, enabling encoding and decoding void types.

Breaking Changes

  • () and Option<T> Sway types are now either required or optional, dependent on where the argument appears in the function arguments.

    Given these Sway functions:

    fn type_then_void_then_type(x: u8, y: (), z: u8) -> ()
fn type_then_void_then_void(x: u8, y: (), z: ()) -> ()

fn type_then_option_then_type(x: u8, y: Option<u8>, z: u8) -> ()
fn type_then_option_then_option(x: u8, y: Option<u8>, z: Option<u8>) -> ()

    This is what changes:

    // before
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_void(42) // Unchanged

contract.functions.type_then_option_then_type(42, undefined, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option_then_option(42, undefined, undefined)
    // after
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, undefined, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_void(42) // Unchanged 

contract.functions.type_then_option_then_type(42, undefined, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option_then_option(42)

Checklist

  • I added — tests to prove my changes
  • I updated — all the necessary docs
  • I reviewed — the entire PR myself, using the GitHub UI
  • I described — all breaking changes and the Migration Guide

@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 added the feat Issue is a feature label Jul 16, 2024
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 added this to the 0.x post-launch milestone Jul 16, 2024
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 self-assigned this Jul 16, 2024
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 changed the title Ps/feat/void coder feat: implement VoidCoder Jul 16, 2024
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2024 11:22
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 marked this pull request as draft July 17, 2024 11:28
@vercel Vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jul 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
fuels-ts ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jul 17, 2024 2:39pm

@arboleya arboleya removed this from the 0.x mainnet milestone Jul 19, 2024
danielbate
danielbate reviewed Jul 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@danielbate danielbate left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

// before
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option(42, undefined)
// after
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, undefined, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option(42)

Context question, how come we are treating these two things differently? I'd expect to pass () and Option::None in the same way?

@petertonysmith94
Copy link
Contributor Author 

// before
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option(42, undefined)
// after
contract.functions.type_then_void_then_type(42, undefined, 43)
contract.functions.type_then_option(42)

Context question, how come we are treating these two things differently? I'd expect to pass () and Option::None in the same way?

They are treated the same - maybe the example that I provided is confusing - I've updated the example, please let me know if that clears it up.

Torres-ssf
Torres-ssf previously approved these changes Jul 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
@danielbate
Copy link
Contributor

@petertonysmith94 thankyou for clearing it up. Makes sense, we are treating them the same, it is actually dependent on their position in the function arguments that had thrown me off.

@petertonysmith94
Copy link
Contributor Author

petertonysmith94 commented Jul 30, 2024 •
edited
Loading

@petertonysmith94 thankyou for clearing it up. Makes sense, we are treating them the same, it is actually dependent on their position in the function arguments that had thrown me off.

Correct - do you think the breaking change description needs work?

maschad
maschad previously approved these changes Jul 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@maschad maschad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome!

@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 dismissed stale reviews from Torres-ssf and maschad via 1b15522 July 30, 2024 15:03
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Coverage Report:

Lines Branches Functions Statements
79.49%(+0.14%) 71.79%(+0.29%) 77.46%(+0.14%) 79.63%(+0.15%)
Changed Files:
Ok File (✨=New File) Lines Branches Functions Statements
🔴 packages/abi-coder/src/FunctionFragment.ts 62.16%
(+10.24%)		 37.5%
(+2.5%)		 66.66%
(+9.52%)		 61.53%
(+11.53%)
✅ ✨ packages/abi-coder/src/encoding/coders/VoidCoder.ts 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)
🔴 packages/abi-coder/src/encoding/strategies/getCoderV1.ts 91.66%
(+0.18%)		 87.09%
(+0.43%)		 100%
(+0%)		 91.83%
(+0.17%)
🔴 packages/abi-coder/src/utils/constants.ts 97.5%
(+0.14%)		 100%
(+0%)		 0%
(+0%)		 97.5%
(+0.14%)
✅ ✨ packages/abi-coder/src/utils/getFunctionInputs.ts 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)
✅ ✨ packages/abi-coder/src/utils/padValuesWithUndefined.ts 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)
✅ ✨ packages/abi-typegen/src/utils/getFunctionInputs.ts 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)
✅ ✨ packages/abi-typegen/src/utils/getTypeDeclaration.ts 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)		 100%
(+100%)

@danielbate
Copy link
Contributor

() and Option Sway types are now either required or optional, depending on the circumstances.

() and Option<T> Sway types are now either required or optional, dependent on where the argument appears in the function arguments.

@petertonysmith94 change for breaking changes maybe?

danielbate
danielbate approved these changes Jul 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@danielbate danielbate left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Clean 🧹

@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 merged commit 9c07b00 into master Jul 30, 2024
25 checks passed
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 deleted the ps/feat/void-coder branch July 30, 2024 15:44
@fuel-service-user fuel-service-user mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2024
Merged
@nedsalk nedsalk mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2024
Closed
@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94 mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2024
Merged
4 tasks
@nedsalk nedsalk mentioned this pull request Sep 2, 2024
Merged
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@nedsalk nedsalk nedsalk approved these changes

@maschad maschad maschad approved these changes

@danielbate danielbate danielbate approved these changes

@digorithm digorithm Awaiting requested review from digorithm digorithm is a code owner

@arboleya arboleya Awaiting requested review from arboleya arboleya is a code owner

@Dhaiwat10 Dhaiwat10 Awaiting requested review from Dhaiwat10 Dhaiwat10 is a code owner

@Torres-ssf Torres-ssf Awaiting requested review from Torres-ssf Torres-ssf is a code owner

Assignees

@petertonysmith94 petertonysmith94

Labels
feat Issue is a feature
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Make Option<x> optional with typegen Implement VoidCoder Improve empty type for ABI Coder and Typegen
6 participants
@petertonysmith94 @nedsalk @danielbate @maschad @Torres-ssf @arboleya