refactor(contract-verifier): Brush up contract verifier #3189
Conversation
This file contains 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
slowli
force-pushed
the
aov-pla-1059-brush-up-contract-verifier
branch
from
c630768 to
45003b5
Compare
slowli
force-pushed
the
aov-pla-1059-brush-up-contract-verifier
branch
from
45003b5 to
ddc5c8e
Compare
slowli
requested review from
yorik,
alexandrst88,
artmakh,
hatemosphere,
onyxet,
otani88 and
iluwaa
slowli
commented
Oct 29, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Is the contract verifier library used somewhere externally? (Looks like that judging by commit history.) These uses would probably need to be updated, and I'm not quite sure which verifier APIs should be public.
- I don't see a compelling reason why the contract verifier API should be a node component, especially given that the verifier backend is not a component. I think it could work autonomously provided that it uses some interface to interact with a node (namely, fetch the contract bytecode, contract deployer events and the deploying transaction). All of these seem to be covered by the Web3 RPC. Would such a refactoring be too deep to handle? (Obviously, won't do it in this PR since it's large as-is.)
perekopskiy
previously approved these changes
Oct 31, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the contract verifier library used somewhere externally?
@AntonD3 please help with it.
I don't see a compelling reason why the contract verifier API should be a node component
It shouldn't. It was a compromise to put it there. Overall I wouldn't proceed with any deep refactoring unless it's clearly needed/beneficial short term. There were discussions about moving contract verifier out of zksync-era somewhere closer to block-explorer but this was deprioritized. So its future is not determined
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks
perekopskiy
approved these changes
Nov 1, 2024
yorik
approved these changes
Nov 1, 2024
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to no response for status checks
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks
popzxc
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2024
|
@popzxc I'm preparing a follow-up PR that adds EVM emulation support to the contract verifier; will address your suggestions there. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What ❔
Brushes up contract verifier code.
Why ❔
Would make it easier to support EVM emulation in the contract verifier.
Checklist
zkstack dev fmtandzkstack dev lint.