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

Soft-Forkability: table of allowed opcodes in cost function #503

Merged
merged 28 commits into from
Jun 13, 2019
Merged

Soft-Forkability: table of allowed opcodes in cost function #503

merged 28 commits into from
Jun 13, 2019

Conversation

greenhat
Copy link
Collaborator

@greenhat greenhat commented May 21, 2019 •
edited

Close #499

Todo:

  • issue OpCodeExtra codes for all ops in getOpCodeEx;
  • add SoftForkabilitySpec test for OpCodeExtra;
  • make op code types TaggedType;

@greenhat greenhat added the S-wip Status: Work in progress label May 21, 2019
aslesarenko
aslesarenko requested changes May 21, 2019
View reviewed changes
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch 3 times, most recently from febeb0f to ebff9f8 Compare May 23, 2019 05:17
@greenhat greenhat added S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge and removed S-wip Status: Work in progress labels May 23, 2019
aslesarenko
aslesarenko requested changes May 23, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@aslesarenko aslesarenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In addition to comments, please add tests in SoftForkabilitySpecification. See other tests for inspiration.

src/main/scala/org/ergoplatform/Validation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/TreeBuilding.scala Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Show resolved Hide resolved
@aslesarenko aslesarenko added S-wip Status: Work in progress and removed S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge labels May 23, 2019
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from 7d4c8dc to ad63c39 Compare May 26, 2019 05:58
@greenhat greenhat added S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge and removed S-wip Status: Work in progress labels May 26, 2019
aslesarenko
aslesarenko requested changes May 26, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@aslesarenko aslesarenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See comments

src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Show resolved Hide resolved
@aslesarenko aslesarenko mentioned this pull request May 28, 2019
Merged
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from 8966d98 to 813cf77 Compare May 28, 2019 09:41
@aslesarenko aslesarenko added this to the 1-Mainnet Candidate milestone May 30, 2019
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from 813cf77 to f0b4eed Compare May 30, 2019 12:07
@greenhat greenhat changed the base branch from soft-forkability2 to v2.1 May 30, 2019 12:07
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from fb63289 to 54c8331 Compare June 2, 2019 05:53
aslesarenko
aslesarenko requested changes Jun 3, 2019
View reviewed changes
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/main/scala/sigmastate/eval/Evaluation.scala Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@aslesarenko aslesarenko added S-wip Status: Work in progress and removed S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge labels Jun 3, 2019
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from 8001604 to fc10b13 Compare June 4, 2019 15:49
@greenhat greenhat added S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge and removed S-wip Status: Work in progress labels Jun 4, 2019
greenhat and others added 20 commits June 12, 2019 12:08
@greenhat
add the rest of the Def to OpCode conversions;
ff65550
@greenhat
fix conflicting rule id after rebase;
86bc5cb
@greenhat
use SoftForkWhenCodeAdded trait;
e2487c3
@greenhat
add SoftForkabilitySpec test for CheckCostFuncOperation;
75add8d 
add support for nested validation rules (throw inner validation exception);
@greenhat
performance optimizations;
a6159b6
@greenhat
add more Def => op codes translation;
5bba45d
@greenhat
add even more Def => op codes translation;
a4c97fa
@greenhat
eliminate redundant allocation;
5f39325
@greenhat
comment;
59e4555
@greenhat
fix build after merge conflict resolution;
e0fad37
@greenhat
build fixes after rebase conflict resolution;
80f6dd3
@greenhat
fix validation rule id conflict;
7ecb24e
@aslesarenko @greenhat
Added description of extended op code encoding (see OpCodes)
6549926
@greenhat
add OpCodeExtra;
f63c66d
@greenhat
add SFSpec test for OpCodeExtra;
b3007a0
@greenhat
issue OpCodeExtra to the non-serializable ops;
0fd84ac
@greenhat
code formatting;
7181663
@greenhat
shift back OpCode values into signed byte range;
6982fa8
@greenhat
Make OpCode and OpCodeExtra a TaggedType;
3624ffe 
remove OpCode <-> OpCodeExtra conversion in validation rule;
@greenhat
fix build;
5ea4406
@greenhat greenhat force-pushed the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch from 36c4607 to 5ea4406 Compare June 12, 2019 09:08
@aslesarenko aslesarenko changed the base branch from v2.1.2 to v2.2 June 12, 2019 12:37
This was referenced Jun 12, 2019
Closed
Merged
@aslesarenko aslesarenko merged commit 9e1b7ab into v2.2 Jun 13, 2019
@catena2w catena2w deleted the i499-allowed-opcodes-in-cost-func branch June 18, 2019 09:35
@greenhat greenhat mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2019
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@aslesarenko aslesarenko aslesarenko requested changes

@kushti kushti kushti approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
S-ready-for-merge Status: This PR is ready for merge
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v2.2
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@greenhat @aslesarenko @kushti