This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 19, 2024. It is now read-only.
fix(solc): invalid cached artifacts #783
Merged
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
mattsse
changed the title
gakonst
approved these changes
Jan 11, 2022
Comment on lines
+144
to
+145
| let src = project | ||
| .add_source( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this technique makes test building so much easier
Comment on lines
+873
to
+875
| T::contract_name(&path).map(|name| { | ||
| (format!("{}:{}", path.file_name().unwrap().to_string_lossy(), name), art) | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was there a bug here and you do to_string_lossy? I guess the issue would be that due to the {:?} the key becomes a quoted string, which ends up having a different key from {}:{}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this added quotes for the file path like \"file\":name
Comment on lines
+878
to
+888
| let artifacts: Box<dyn Iterator<Item = (String, T::Artifact)>> = if let Some(output) = | ||
| self.compiler_output.take() | ||
| { | ||
| Box::new(artifacts.chain(T::output_to_artifacts(output).into_values().flatten().map( | ||
| |(name, artifact)| { | ||
| (format!("{}:{}", T::output_file_name(&name).display(), name), artifact) | ||
| }, | ||
| ))) | ||
| } else { | ||
| Box::new(artifacts) | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah good catch
we used different keys for the into_artifacts iterator, while for cached artifacts we used : we only used the name for recompiled assets
Comment on lines
+215
to
+221
| // ensure change is detected | ||
| assert!(!compiled.is_unchanged()); | ||
| // and all recompiled artifacts are different | ||
| for (p, artifact) in compiled.into_artifacts() { | ||
| let other = artifacts.remove(&p).unwrap(); | ||
| assert_ne!(artifact, other); | ||
| } |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
Motivation
foundry-rs/foundry#316
the way we checked if we need to recompile a contract was too optimistic and didn't check for their usage properly so in foundry-rs/foundry#316 we only recompiled the base contract and not the contract that inherits.
This was fixed but should be improved, generally the whole compile <-> cache pipeline is ripe for a v2 rewrite that uses the new dependency path.
I also discovered and fixed the issue that's likely related to #727, we used different keys for the
into_artifactsiterator, while for cached artifacts we used<file>:<name>we only used the name for recompiled assets. but #727 needs an additional test as follow-up.Solution
resolve all imports and check if they were changed.
PR Checklist