feat: passing partial log through transient storage #9295
Closed
benesjan wants to merge 8 commits into
Closed
Conversation
Contributor
Author
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
benesjan
changed the title
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
from
94fa09d to
75a5ef9
Compare
benesjan
changed the base branch from
master
to
09-17-feat_bytes_to_fields_and_back
This was referenced Oct 21, 2024
benesjan
commented
Oct 21, 2024
| for i in 0..expected_compressed_point_positive_sign.len() { | ||
| assert_eq(compressed_point[i], expected_compressed_point_positive_sign[i]); | ||
| } | ||
| assert_eq(expected_compressed_point_positive_sign, compressed_point); |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.
benesjan
commented
Oct 21, 2024
| for i in 0..expected_compressed_point_negative_sign.len() { | ||
| assert_eq(compressed_point[i], expected_compressed_point_negative_sign[i]); | ||
| } | ||
| assert_eq(expected_compressed_point_negative_sign, compressed_point); |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.
benesjan
commented
Oct 21, 2024
| for i in 0..31 { | ||
| assert_eq(inputs[i], return_bytes[i]); | ||
| } | ||
| assert_eq(inputs, return_bytes); |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.
benesjan
commented
Oct 21, 2024
| for i in 0..31 { | ||
| assert_eq(return_bytes2[i], return_bytes[i]); | ||
| } | ||
| assert_eq(return_bytes2, return_bytes); |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.
This was referenced Oct 21, 2024
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
from
b86c06e to
142193f
Compare
benesjan
changed the base branch from
09-17-feat_bytes_to_fields_and_back
to
10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows
branch
from
67d9ff2 to
e00a732
Compare
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
from
fab6ec1 to
b4cc503
Compare
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows
branch
from
e00a732 to
b08d105
Compare
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
from
b4cc503 to
c6e3cf1
Compare
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows
branch
from
b08d105 to
63f9e9b
Compare
benesjan
force-pushed
the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
from
c6e3cf1 to
e6e8d54
Compare
benesjan
changed the title
benesjan
deleted the
10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs
branch
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR re-introduces changes reverted in this PR. There is 1 difference compared to the original code. In the original code we stored number of public values appended and in this PR we store only a flag indicating whether public values were appended. We can afford to do this because now we have information about the public/partial fields in the ABI. This makes it possible to optimize the DA cost further as now we need only 1 bit of info and not a byte.