Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add slice_data_equal? to stdlib.fc #730

Open
wants to merge 18 commits into
base: testnet
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

akifoq
Copy link
Contributor

@akifoq akifoq commented Jun 26, 2023

The stdlib already has the functions slice_empty?, slice_data_empty? and slice_refs_empty? corresponding to "SEMPTY", "SDEMPTY" and "SREMPTY" assembly instructions.

It's clear that the function name corresponding to assembly instruction 'SDEQ' should be slice_data_equal?, not equal_slice_bits, in order to maintain consistent naming conventions. Unfortunately, the mistake of calling the function equal_slice_bits has already been made, but at least it is possible to add the correct name as well.

EmelyanenkoK and others added 18 commits April 30, 2023 21:54
Co-authored-by: SpyCheese <mikle98@yandex.ru>
…e-update

Isolated outbound message queue update
…sus_config limits in collator (ton-blockchain#692)

Co-authored-by: SpyCheese <mikle98@yandex.ru>
…date_improvement

Isolated validate improvement: higher auto validation limits and account for processed external messages when building block
The stdlib already has the functions `slice_empty?`, `slice_data_empty?` and `slice_refs_empty?` corresponding to "SEMPTY", "SDEMPTY" and "SREMPTY" assembly instructions. 

It's clear that the function name corresponding to assembly instruction 'SDEQ' should be `slice_data_equal?`, not `equal_slice_bits`, in order to maintain consistent naming conventions. Unfortunately, the mistake of calling the function `equal_slice_bits` has already been made, but at least it is possible to add the correct name as well.
@EmelyanenkoK EmelyanenkoK changed the base branch from master to testnet June 27, 2023 07:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants