feat(dynamic-transaction-model): nc actions fees

[raul-oliveira]

Depends on 1350

Motivation

According to the RFC documentation, withdraw and deposit actions involving fee tokens must pay a fee.

Actions execute before contract execution and accept a token ID, which can be generated deterministically. When an action receives a token_uid that has not yet been created (called a create_token syscall), it's not possible to determine the version of that token, and therefore calculate the fee.

Aiming to bring balance consistency during nano contract execution, we are introducing the NCFee.

Acceptance Criteria

• Contexts should accept a NCFee array containing a token_uid and amount to inform which token will be used to pay fees.
• validate if the amount provided in the fees is exact the same required for the operations to run
• validate the fee amount checking if it's positive, and multiple of 100
• implement the paid_fees dict which contains all the fees paid by inter contract calls (nc x nc)
• validate if all the tokens present in the paid_fees are deposit based or HTR
• should allow token creation and withdrawal in the same syscall

Checklist

• [] If you are requesting a merge into master, confirm this code is production-ready and can be included in future releases as soon as it gets merged

[github-actions]

Bencher Report

Branch	raul-oliveira/charge-nc-actions-fee
Testbed	ubuntu-22.04

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result minutes (m) (Result Δ%)	Lower Boundary minutes (m) (Limit %)	Upper Boundary minutes (m) (Limit %)
sync-v2 (up to 20000 blocks)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1.96 m (+13.96%) Baseline: 1.72 m	1.55 m (78.97%)	2.07 m (94.97%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 93.75000% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.94%. Comparing base (d708ede) to head (b207594).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
hathor/nanocontracts/runner/runner.py	93.33%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
hathor/transaction/headers/fee_header.py	50.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
hathor/transaction/base_transaction.py	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1406      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.94%   85.94%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         434      434              
  Lines       33675    33739      +64     
  Branches     5278     5291      +13     
==========================================
+ Hits        28943    28996      +53     
- Misses       3686     3696      +10     
- Partials     1046     1047       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[raul-oliveira]

#1406 (comment)
@jansegre
I also don't like the syntax for the same reason. I'm OK with the first 2 arguments being positional (and maybe positional-only), the rest could be kwarg-only, with defaults that make sense.

We discussed this point and @glevco addressed it in the #1451