Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 13, 2022. It is now read-only.

[EVM] EVM Compliance Issues #674

Closed
smblucker opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

[EVM] EVM Compliance Issues #674

smblucker opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 6 comments
Labels

Comments

@smblucker
Copy link

smblucker commented Jan 25, 2018

The following are a compiled list of issues related to the EVM; it includes all issues compiled in #588 by @silasdavis as well as subsequent issues:

Table of Contents:

  • EIP Implementation Issues
  • Bad/Invalid Jumpdest Issues
  • Invalid Opcodes
  • Chain Stopping Issues

EIP Implementation Issues
Byzantium:

Constantinople:

Bad/Invalid Jumpdest Issues

Invalid Opcodes

Chain Stopping Issues

@silasdavis silasdavis changed the title EVM Issues (updated) EVM Compliance Issues Mar 4, 2018
@kyriediculous
Copy link

Is there an ETA on exceptions rather than using if-else-> Boolean ?

What version of solc is burrow using atm?

Thank you in advance!

@compleatang compleatang changed the title EVM Compliance Issues [EVM] EVM Compliance Issues May 30, 2018
@compleatang
Copy link
Contributor

@kyriediculous we test against solc 0.4.22 at the moment.

@kyriediculous
Copy link

@compleatang That's super awesome !

That means the five-types model might actually work well now that we can return dynamic types from functions (despite from gas cost maybe)

@compleatang
Copy link
Contributor

hahaha. well, considering we've been writing five-types models since before solc existed, I certainly hope so :)

@compleatang
Copy link
Contributor

compleatang commented May 30, 2018

Also @kyriediculous we have a test for dynamic arrays at least here -> https://github.com/monax/bosmarmot/pull/39

We'd love some help writing a test for dynamic types if you had a moment....

@silasdavis
Copy link
Contributor

silasdavis commented Nov 8, 2018

Finally fixed by #940 and #953

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants