feat(json-rpc): initial package #2
Closed
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
ludamad
changed the title
LeilaWang
reviewed
Mar 7, 2023
yarn-project/json-rpc/README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| const wallet = new JsonRpcClient<WalletImplementation>('wallet-server.com', /*register classes*/ {PublicKey, TxRequest}); | ||
| const response = await wallet.rpc.signTxRequest(accountPubKey, txRequest); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we make it call the methods directly from the client: wallet.signTxRequest?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorta. You need a proxy object to do this, I don't think you can do new ... and have something end up a proxy object. If we instead had a createRpcClient function we could do it. It could just return the .rpc object
ludamad
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 14, 2023
ludamad
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2023
ludamad
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2023
ludamad
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2024
Overview: If you are in a scenario where you have a failing call to check_circuit and wish to get more information out of it than just the gate index, you can use this feature to get a stack trace, see example below. Usage instructions: - On ubuntu (or our mainframe accounts) use `sudo apt-get install libdw-dev` to support trace printing - Use `cmake --preset clang16-dbg-fast-circuit-check-traces` and `cmake --build --preset clang16-dbg-fast-circuit-check-traces` to enable the backward-cpp dependency through the CHECK_CIRCUIT_STACKTRACES CMake variable. - Run any case where you have a failing check_circuit call, you will now have a stack trace illuminating where this constraint was added in code. Caveats: - This works best for code that is not overly generic, i.e. where just the sequence of function calls carries a lot of information. It is possible to tag extra data along with the stack trace, this can be done as a followup, please leave feedback if desired. - There are certain functions like `assert_equals` that can cause gates that occur _before_ them to fail. If this would be useful to automatically report, please leave feedback. Example: ``` [ RUN ] standard_circuit_constructor.test_check_circuit_broken Stack trace (most recent call last): #4 Source "_deps/gtest-src/googletest/src/gtest.cc", line 2845, in Run 2842: if (!Test::HasFatalFailure() && !Test::IsSkipped()) { 2843: // This doesn't throw as all user code that can throw are wrapped into 2844: // exception handling code. >2845: test->Run(); 2846: } 2847: 2848: if (test != nullptr) { #3 Source "_deps/gtest-src/googletest/src/gtest.cc", line 2696, in Run 2693: // GTEST_SKIP(). 2694: if (!HasFatalFailure() && !IsSkipped()) { 2695: impl->os_stack_trace_getter()->UponLeavingGTest(); >2696: internal::HandleExceptionsInMethodIfSupported(this, &Test::TestBody, 2697: "the test body"); 2698: } #2 | Source "_deps/gtest-src/googletest/src/gtest.cc", line 2657, in HandleSehExceptionsInMethodIfSupported<testing::Test, void> | 2655: #if GTEST_HAS_EXCEPTIONS | 2656: try { | >2657: return HandleSehExceptionsInMethodIfSupported(object, method, location); | 2658: } catch (const AssertionException&) { // NOLINT | 2659: // This failure was reported already. Source "_deps/gtest-src/googletest/src/gtest.cc", line 2621, in HandleExceptionsInMethodIfSupported<testing::Test, void> 2618: } 2619: #else 2620: (void)location; >2621: return (object->*method)(); 2622: #endif // GTEST_HAS_SEH 2623: } #1 Source "/mnt/user-data/adam/aztec-packages/barretenberg/cpp/src/barretenberg/circuit_checker/standard_circuit_builder.test.cpp", line 464, in TestBody 461: uint32_t d_idx = circuit_constructor.add_variable(d); 462: circuit_constructor.create_add_gate({ a_idx, b_idx, c_idx, fr::one(), fr::one(), fr::neg_one(), fr::zero() }); 463: > 464: circuit_constructor.create_add_gate({ d_idx, c_idx, a_idx, fr::one(), fr::neg_one(), fr::neg_one(), fr::zero() }); 465: 466: bool result = CircuitChecker::check(circuit_constructor); 467: EXPECT_EQ(result, false); #0 Source "/mnt/user-data/adam/aztec-packages/barretenberg/cpp/src/barretenberg/stdlib_circuit_builders/standard_circuit_builder.cpp", line 22, in create_add_gate 19: { 20: this->assert_valid_variables({ in.a, in.b, in.c }); 21: > 22: blocks.arithmetic.populate_wires(in.a, in.b, in.c); 23: blocks.arithmetic.q_m().emplace_back(FF::zero()); 24: blocks.arithmetic.q_1().emplace_back(in.a_scaling); 25: blocks.arithmetic.q_2().emplace_back(in.b_scaling); gate number4 ```
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.
Description
Please provide a paragraph or two giving a summary of the change, including relevant motivation and context.
Checklist: