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

feat: passing partial log through transient storage #9295

Conversation

benesjan
Copy link
Contributor

This PR re-introduces changes reverted in this PR. There is 1 difference compared to the original code. In the original code we stored number of public values appended and in this PR we store only a flag indicating whether public values were appended. We can afford to do this because now we have information about the public/partial fields in the ABI. This makes it possible to optimize the DA cost further as now we need only 1 bit of info and not a byte.

Copy link
Contributor Author

benesjan commented Oct 21, 2024

@benesjan benesjan changed the title feat: re-introducing public values appended flag in encrypted logs feat: reintroducing public values appended flag in encrypted logs Oct 21, 2024
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch from 94fa09d to 75a5ef9 Compare October 21, 2024 13:14
@benesjan benesjan changed the base branch from master to 09-17-feat_bytes_to_fields_and_back October 21, 2024 13:14
for i in 0..expected_compressed_point_positive_sign.len() {
assert_eq(compressed_point[i], expected_compressed_point_positive_sign[i]);
}
assert_eq(expected_compressed_point_positive_sign, compressed_point);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.

for i in 0..expected_compressed_point_negative_sign.len() {
assert_eq(compressed_point[i], expected_compressed_point_negative_sign[i]);
}
assert_eq(expected_compressed_point_negative_sign, compressed_point);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.

for i in 0..31 {
assert_eq(inputs[i], return_bytes[i]);
}
assert_eq(inputs, return_bytes);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.

for i in 0..31 {
assert_eq(return_bytes2[i], return_bytes[i]);
}
assert_eq(return_bytes2, return_bytes);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change --> the for loop here was unnecessary.

@benesjan benesjan marked this pull request as ready for review October 21, 2024 13:28
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch from b86c06e to 142193f Compare October 21, 2024 13:44
@benesjan benesjan changed the base branch from 09-17-feat_bytes_to_fields_and_back to 10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows October 21, 2024 13:44
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows branch from 67d9ff2 to e00a732 Compare October 21, 2024 14:29
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch from fab6ec1 to b4cc503 Compare October 21, 2024 14:29
@benesjan benesjan marked this pull request as draft October 22, 2024 18:41
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows branch from e00a732 to b08d105 Compare October 22, 2024 19:08
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch from b4cc503 to c6e3cf1 Compare October 22, 2024 19:08
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-10-refactor_updating_nft_flows branch from b08d105 to 63f9e9b Compare October 22, 2024 19:09
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch from c6e3cf1 to e6e8d54 Compare October 22, 2024 19:09
@benesjan benesjan changed the title feat: reintroducing public values appended flag in encrypted logs feat: passing partial log through transient storage Oct 22, 2024
@benesjan benesjan closed this Oct 23, 2024
@benesjan benesjan deleted the 10-21-feat_re-introducing_public_values_appended_flag_in_encrypted_logs branch October 23, 2024 14:25
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.

1 participant