Added EIP-2330: EXTSLOAD #2330
Added EIP-2330: EXTSLOAD #2330
Conversation
EIPS/eip-2121.md
Outdated
| SLOAD (0x5c) | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| * A "fixed(@N)" solidity keyword that marks a contract storage variable as externally readable. The @N is a storage slot address and forces the compiler to put the contract variable at the specified slot N. The data position is thus becoming part of the interface. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think Solidity syntax should be discussed on https://github.com/ethereum/solidity and EIPs changing the EVM have little say in the syntax. They can suggest things, but not as part of a specification.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Additionally there is a very lengthy discussion on the topic of selecting storage slots in the language: ethereum/solidity#597
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I think you're suggesting to split this issue into two -- One for the EVM opcode and one for the Solidity syntax?
Thanks for the link to the discussion. I was not aware of it. The reasoning is very different though. ethereum/solidity#597 is about contract upgrades while this is about supporting off-chain applications (and off-chain evm less applications). I'll try to make my case in a new solidity issue over there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@axic is there something like a solidity EIP process or should I just open an issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no such thing as a Solidity EIP process. Design discussion about the language are not handling in this repo. I'd suggest to open an issue or continue discussion under ethereum/solidity#597.
It is perfectly fine giving examples or explaining what Solidity should do as part of this EIP, but a Solidity specification doesn't belong here. Additionally restricting this EIP to EVM changes only makes the scope smaller, easier to understand and reason about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reasoning is very different though. ethereum/solidity#597 is about contract upgrades while this is about supporting off-chain applications (and off-chain evm less applications).
The reason is different, but there are a bunch of issues on the topic of setting fixed storage locations in the language.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, will split and open a solidity issue
dominicletz
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
40b8c15
to
88ec7c9
Compare
dominicletz
changed the title
|
@axic thanks alot for your comments. I'm heading out now for dinner, but will post a solidity issue tomorrow. |
EIPS/eip-2330.md
Outdated
| @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| eip: 2330 | |||
| title: SLOAD2 | |||
| title: EXTSLOAD | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps you want to extend the title a bit like "EXTSLOAD opcode".
|
I'd also suggest to add a link to the Solidity issue to the example part to aid discussion. |
EIPS/eip-2330.md
Outdated
| A new EVM instruction `EXTSLOAD (0x5c)` that works like `SLOAD (0x54)` with the gas cost of EXTCODE(700) + SLOAD(800) = 1500 and an additional parameter representing the contract that is to be read from. | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| EXTSLOAD <contract> <slot> (0x5c) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this specification is a bit confusing. Is it having two immediate parameters? Is it taking those from the stack?
Please check out https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1052 and https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-145 as examples on the specification section.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, I've looked at those and (hopefully) clarified the specification accordingly.
* Added EIP-2330: SLOAD2 and ABI * Renamed SLOAD2 to EXTSLOAD * Clarifying opcode specification
* Added EIP-2330: SLOAD2 and ABI * Renamed SLOAD2 to EXTSLOAD * Clarifying opcode specification
* Added EIP-2330: SLOAD2 and ABI * Renamed SLOAD2 to EXTSLOAD * Clarifying opcode specification
* Added EIP-2330: SLOAD2 and ABI * Renamed SLOAD2 to EXTSLOAD * Clarifying opcode specification
Initial draft submission, cross-posting on ethereum-magicians