feat[ux]: compile .vyi files

[sandbubbles]

What I did

Allowed compiling ".vyi" files with ast,annotated_ast,interface,external_interface,abi flags.
#4232

How I did it

How to verify it

Commit message

Commit message for the final, squashed PR. (Optional, but reviewers will appreciate it! Please see our commit message style guide for what we would ideally like to see in a commit message.)

Description for the changelog

Cute Animal Picture

[charles-cooper]

looking good to me. @cyberthirst can you take a look?

[cyberthirst]

bit unrelated, but if an interface implements other interface and doesn't implement all the methods, we get the following exception:

vyper.exceptions.InterfaceViolation: Contract does not implement all interface functions: foobar()

Contract does not implement.. although it can be triggered via eg vyper -f abi i.vyi

[cyberthirst]

-f interface doesn't include Flags. is it intended?

[charles-cooper]

-f interface doesn't include Flags. is it intended?

Not intended. May be the order in which we merged flag and -f interfave PRs

[cyberthirst]

shouldn't -f interface be basically an identity when called on interface files?

import ITest2

implements: ITest2

def bar() -> uint256:
    ...

def foo() -> uint8:
    ...


def foobar() -> uint8:
    ...

outputs:

# Functions

@external
def bar() -> uint256:
    ...


@external
def foo() -> uint8:
    ...


@external
def foobar() -> uint8:
    ...

ie implements is lost in the translation

[cyberthirst]

shouldn't -f interface be basically an identity when called on interface files?

import ITest2

implements: ITest2

def bar() -> uint256:
    ...

def foo() -> uint8:
    ...


def foobar() -> uint8:
    ...

outputs:

# Functions

@external
def bar() -> uint256:
    ...


@external
def foo() -> uint8:
    ...


@external
def foobar() -> uint8:
    ...

ie implements is lost in the translation

also, if ITest2.vyi contains a struct (or flag), then those don't propagate for -f interface - not sure whether that's intentional

[cyberthirst]

would it make sense to use this here? https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/4290/files#diff-d428d4c971c9f7166899f6f2d3da5e17ca4478d8d371d803e735d6ee36b39d30R49

so we don't have to maintain the list on 2 places

[cyberthirst]

 vyper -f external_interface tests/custom/ITest.vyi

# External Interfaces
interface Itest:
    def bar() -> uint256: nonpayable
    def foo() -> uint8: nonpayable
    def foobar() -> uint8: nonpayable

name discrepancy - Itest vs ITest

[charles-cooper]

this looks ok to me. @cyberthirst what did we decide about the -f interface behavior here?

[charles-cooper]

i think for -f interface we should not require it to be the identity. it should spit out something that is more or less independent from the file's codebase/context.

but it's not that important. if we can't reach consensus, we can always block the behavior.

[cyberthirst]

# test__interface.vyi

@external
def foo():
    ...

-f external_interface

IndexError: string index out of range
Error compiling: tests/custom/test__interface.vyi

should crash on name = "".join([x[0].upper() + x[1:] for x in stem.split("_")])

[cyberthirst]

i think for -f interface we should not require it to be the identity. it should spit out something that is more or less independent from the file's codebase/context.

but it's not that important. if we can't reach consensus, we can always block the behavior.

yeah this sounds reasonable, i was reporting rather for completness

[cyberthirst]

say we have

flag Foo:
    Blah

@external
def foo() -> Foo:
    ...

then with -f external_interface we'd get:

# External Interfaces
interface Ifile:
    def foo() -> flag Foo('Blah'): nonpayable

which is not valid syntax, is that intentional?

[cyberthirst]

we can import stateful modules to the vyi files and eg call initializes on them:

# ifile.vyi
import test

initializes: test

@external
def foo(a: test.Foo) -> test.Foo:
    ...

# test.vy

c: uint256

flag Foo:
    Blah

@external
def foo() -> Foo:
    return Foo.Blah

works eg with -f annotated_ast