-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
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
[6.0] Lazy default for Option.getOrElse and Coll.getOrElse #1008
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
dd62bd7
failing tests
kushti aaef77e
close #906: lazy evaluation of default in Option.getOrElse and Coll.g…
kushti 8f9b549
Merge branch 'v6.0.0' of github.com:ScorexFoundation/sigmastate-inter…
kushti 4c63a60
LSV5 & LSV6 tests
kushti 61f90cd
assertEXceptionThrown
kushti 26809c9
passing but improper changedFeature test
kushti 57ba522
merging w. 6.0.0
kushti 8da3575
fixed tests in LSV6
kushti 8f45909
merging w 6.0.0
kushti f151e1d
merging w. 6.0.0
kushti File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@ | |
*.fdb_latexmk | ||
*.gz | ||
|
||
|
||
yarn.lock | ||
*.log | ||
yarn.lock | ||
|
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Protocol change like this can be tested using changeFeature (see other tests) in combination with newVersionedResults (also see code). In this case both old and new behaviour will be tested.
In principle this test case can be moved to LSV6.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
changedFeature is not enough here, you need for versioned verifyCases, as in 6.0 costing trace would be different in some cases due to difference in default evaluation (at the same time, it wouldnt provide higher cost, so the change is secure costing-wise).
Seems like *Feature machinery is overly complex, but still not enough to describe protocol changes, thus I would recommend to decide what it is actually testing (or should test), and then follow simpler approaches
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please see other examples where changedFeature is used, there are test cases where cost trace depend on the version and you can pass different traces to the constructor of Expected.
The perceived complexity is due to learning curve.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
changedFeature is tied to V4/V5 switch, see checkExpected in ChangedFeature / checkVerify functions in SigmaDslTesting. So it cant be used in V6 testing without modifications it seems. So it is definitely not about learning curve, changedFeature is just not ready for V6
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@aslesarenko see #1024 for example
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done