feat(nano): Add address balance in global state by msbrogli · Pull Request #1431 · HathorNetwork/hathor-core

msbrogli · 2025-09-25T21:55:53Z

Motivation

What was the motivation for the changes in this PR?

Acceptance Criteria

Include here all things that this PR should solve

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 · 2025-09-25T22:04:35Z

Bencher Report

Branch	feat/nano-address-balance
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	1.66 m (-2.73%) Baseline: 1.71 m	1.54 m (92.53%)	2.05 m (81.06%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

codecov · 2026-02-18T17:00:04Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 74.54545% with 84 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.66%. Comparing base (a98679e) to head (572f68d).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
hathor/verification/transfer_header_verifier.py	54.41%	23 Missing and 8 partials ⚠️
hathor/transaction/transaction.py	42.85%	15 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
hathor/consensus/consensus.py	11.11%	7 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
hathor/dag_builder/vertex_exporter.py	84.09%	5 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
hathor/nanocontracts/runner/runner.py	40.00%	3 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
hathor/transaction/headers/transfer_header.py	92.50%	3 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
hathor/dag_builder/builder.py	75.00%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
hathor/verification/verification_service.py	71.42%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
hathor/verification/vertex_verifier.py	33.33%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
hathor/transaction/base_transaction.py	50.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
... and 1 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1431      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.68%   85.66%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         442      444       +2     
  Lines       33846    34155     +309     
  Branches     5293     5347      +54     
==========================================
+ Hits        29000    29260     +260     
- Misses       3824     3859      +35     
- Partials     1022     1036      +14

Flag	Coverage Δ
test-lib	`85.66% <74.54%> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:36:30Z

hathor/nanocontracts/runner/runner.py

+            # XXX Should we fail?
+            return
+
+        # XXX Should we check for the size to prevent miscalling with a contract id?


Yes! Transfer to contracts should be made exclusively by deposits.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:37:17Z

hathor/nanocontracts/storage/block_storage.py

            raise NanoContractDoesNotExist(contract_id.hex())
-        token_proxy = TokenProxy(self)
-        return NCContractStorage(trie=trie, nc_id=contract_id, token_proxy=token_proxy)
+        block_proxy = TokenProxy(self)


Maybe rename TokenProxy to RestrictedBlockProxy?

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:38:26Z

hathor/nanocontracts/storage/restricted_block_proxy.py

@@ -51,3 +51,6 @@ def create_token(
            token_symbol=token_symbol,
            token_version=token_version
        )
+
+    def add_address_balance(self, address: Address, amount: Amount, token_id: TokenUid) -> None:


Missing docstring.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:39:18Z

hathor/nanocontracts/storage/block_storage.py

+            return Amount(balance)
+
+    def add_address_balance(self, address: Address, amount: Amount, token_id: TokenUid) -> None:
+        key = AddressBalanceKey(address, token_id)


Shouldn't we assert that address is an actual address (never a contract id)?

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:39:48Z

hathor/nanocontracts/blueprint_env.py

            fees=fees or (),
        )
+
+    def transfer_to_address(self, address: Address, amount: Amount) -> None:


What about the token id?

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:43:26Z

hathor/verification/transfer_header_verifier.py

+            raise TooManySigOps(f'sigops count greater than max: {sigops_count} > {MAX_SCRIPT_SIGOPS_COUNT}')
+
+        try:
+            raw_script_eval(


Make sure it works properly for P2SH.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:46:24Z

hathor_tests/tx/test_transfer_header.py

+            tx2.nc_transfer_input = 10 HTR main
+            tx2.nc_transfer_output = 10 HTR main


Should we allow an input and an output of the same token? I guess not.

I just checked the verifier and it is not allowed. How's this test passing? Are they using different addresses?

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:49:55Z

hathor_tests/tx/test_transfer_header.py

Missing test adding to the mempool with an output greater than the available balance.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:51:03Z

hathor_tests/tx/test_transfer_header.py

Missing test where the execution with transfer headers is successful. Actually, at least three tests, one with transfer headers, another with a contract transfer, and, finally, another with transfer headers and contract transfer.

msbrogli · 2026-02-18T17:51:51Z

hathor_tests/tx/test_transfer_header.py

Missing test where the execution fails (but not because of the transfer). In this case, the transfer should not be persisted. Another test where the execution fails because of the transfer (low balance). In this case, the transfer should be persisted as well.

Co-authored-by: Jan Segre <jan@hathor.network>

msbrogli self-assigned this Sep 25, 2025

msbrogli added this to Hathor Network Sep 25, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to Todo in Hathor Network Sep 25, 2025

msbrogli moved this from Todo to In Progress (WIP) in Hathor Network Sep 25, 2025

msbrogli force-pushed the feat/nano-address-balance branch 13 times, most recently from 8899037 to c63ed89 Compare October 2, 2025 16:50

jansegre assigned jansegre and unassigned msbrogli Oct 24, 2025

jansegre force-pushed the feat/nano-address-balance branch from c63ed89 to 67993eb Compare October 24, 2025 14:57

jansegre force-pushed the feat/nano-address-balance branch from 67993eb to d99ce6c Compare February 10, 2026 16:33

jansegre marked this pull request as ready for review February 10, 2026 16:33

jansegre self-requested a review as a code owner February 10, 2026 16:33

msbrogli force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from eb416fa to 21d7909 Compare February 12, 2026 23:12

jansegre force-pushed the feat/nano-address-balance branch from d99ce6c to 572f68d Compare February 18, 2026 16:38

jansegre moved this from In Progress (WIP) to In Progress (Done) in Hathor Network Feb 18, 2026

msbrogli commented Feb 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

jansegre moved this from In Progress (Done) to In Review (WIP) in Hathor Network Feb 19, 2026

feat(nano): Add address balance in global state

7f00f0f

Co-authored-by: Jan Segre <jan@hathor.network>

jansegre force-pushed the feat/nano-address-balance branch from 572f68d to 7f00f0f Compare February 27, 2026 16:58

		tx2.nc_transfer_input = 10 HTR main
		tx2.nc_transfer_output = 10 HTR main

Conversation

msbrogli commented Sep 25, 2025

Motivation

Acceptance Criteria

Checklist

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Codecov Report

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!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading