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

Document the use cases for verbatim and why it cannot be used in inline assembly #15037

Open
PaulRBerg opened this issue Apr 17, 2024 · 7 comments

Comments

@PaulRBerg
Copy link
Contributor

Page

https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/v0.8.25/yul.html#verbatim

Problem

The current documentation does not say much about the potential use cases for verbatim. My understanding is that this syntax was added in order for Optimism to avoid having to maintain a fork of solc. This seems like a problem that many rollups/ L2s will encounter, and so I think it should be more explicitly documented.

Furthermore, it would be helpful to add a note about why this syntax is unavailable in inline assembly, and why it will remain so in the near future.

More Context

I've asked some questions about verbatim in the Matrix server, which have been answered by @cameel. His answers would be a good starting point for an updated documentation:

SCR-20240417-mqol

Related

#12067

@nikola-matic
Copy link
Collaborator

I've added it to our focus board so it doesn't get lost, but consider this triaged.

Copy link

This issue has been marked as stale due to inactivity for the last 90 days.
It will be automatically closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale The issue/PR was marked as stale because it has been open for too long. label Jul 18, 2024
@IaroslavMazur
Copy link

@nikola-matic, is this issue still going to be taken care of?

@nikola-matic nikola-matic removed the stale The issue/PR was marked as stale because it has been open for too long. label Jul 18, 2024
@nikola-matic
Copy link
Collaborator

Heya @IaroslavMazur, I've removed the stale label from the issue. We'll get to it eventually, but at the moment we're working on a verbatim blog post (amongst other things, most recently we released a via-ir blog post) precisely because the community keeps asking about it, and we figure that initially we'll have greater reach with said blog post; of course, all of the relevant info will end up in the docs.

@IaroslavMazur
Copy link

Heya @IaroslavMazur, I've removed the stale label from the issue. We'll get to it eventually, but at the moment we're working on a verbatim blog post (amongst other things, most recently we released a via-ir blog post) precisely because the community keeps asking about it, and we figure that initially we'll have greater reach with said blog post; of course, all of the relevant info will end up in the docs.

Thank you for the update, Nikola.

Glad to hear that the 'verbatim' instruction is going to be documented better!

Copy link

This issue has been marked as stale due to inactivity for the last 90 days.
It will be automatically closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale The issue/PR was marked as stale because it has been open for too long. label Oct 17, 2024
@IaroslavMazur
Copy link

Hey, @nikola-matic, could you, please, remove the 'stale' label again?

@nikola-matic nikola-matic removed the stale The issue/PR was marked as stale because it has been open for too long. label Oct 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants