chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768

avivg-starkware · 2024-12-18T15:25:48Z

No description provided.

reviewable-StarkWare · 2024-12-18T15:25:56Z

This change is

avivg-starkware · 2024-12-18T15:26:06Z

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768 👈 (View in Graphite)
main-v0.13.4

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

github-actions · 2024-12-18T15:30:48Z

Artifacts upload workflows:

noaov1

Reviewed 7 of 7 files at r2, 1 of 1 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 7 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware and @avivg-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/test_utils/contracts.rs line 183 at r3 (raw file):

    }

    pub fn get_casm(&self) -> CompiledClassV1 {

Consider sharing code withget_class.

Code quote:

pub fn get_casm(&self) -> CompiledClassV1 {

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 19 at r3 (raw file):

    let mut contract_class = test_contract.get_contract_class();
    // Truncate the sierra program to trigger an error.
    contract_class.sierra_program = contract_class.sierra_program[..100].to_vec();

Nice :)
Is there a way to cause a compilation error by "damaging" the SierraContractClass object?

Code quote:

    // Truncate the sierra program to trigger an error.
    contract_class.sierra_program = contract_class.sierra_program[..100].to_vec();

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 77 at r3 (raw file):

        "Sender should be able to send a request successfully"
    );
}

Consider unifying these tests with test_cases.
You can also check: no compiler when cairo-native is off.

Code quote:

#[test]
fn test_sender_with_native_compilation_disabled() {
    let config = ContractClassManagerConfig { run_cairo_native: false, ..Default::default() };
    let manager = ContractClassManager::start(config);
    assert!(manager.sender.is_none(), "Sender should be None when native compilation is disabled");
}

#[test]
fn test_sender_with_native_compilation_enabled() {
    let config = ContractClassManagerConfig { run_cairo_native: true, ..Default::default() };
    let manager = ContractClassManager::start(config);
    assert!(manager.sender.is_some());

    assert!(
        manager.sender.as_ref().unwrap().try_send(create_test_request()).is_ok(),
        "Sender should be able to send a request successfully"
    );
}

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 80 at r3 (raw file):

#[test]
fn test_send_request_channel_disconnected() {

Can you please explain this test?

Code quote:

fn test_send_request_channel_disconnected()

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 108 at r3 (raw file):

    let result = std::panic::catch_unwind(std::panic::AssertUnwindSafe(|| {
        manager.send_compilation_request(second_request);
    }));

Why is the catch_unwind needed?

Code quote:

    let result = std::panic::catch_unwind(std::panic::AssertUnwindSafe(|| {
        manager.send_compilation_request(second_request);
    }));

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 114 at r3 (raw file):

#[test]
fn test_run_compilation_worker_success() {

?

Suggestion:

fn test_process_compilation_request_success() {

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager.rs line 33 at r3 (raw file):

pub const DEFAULT_COMPILATION_REQUEST_CHANNEL_SIZE: usize = 1000;

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]

We will want to test it even when the cairo-native flag is off.

Code quote:

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]

noaov1

Reviewed 1 of 3 files at r16, 1 of 4 files at r30, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 10 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/global_cache.rs line 33 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, avivg-starkware wrote…

Done

Why only for tests?

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 74 at r30 (raw file):

        ContractClassManagerConfig { cairo_native_run_config: native_config, ..Default::default() };
    ContractClassManager::start(config)
}

Suggestion:

impl ContractClassManager {
    fn create_for testing(native_config: CairoNativeRunConfig) -> Self {
        let config =
            ContractClassManagerConfig { cairo_native_run_config: native_config, ..Default::default() };
        ContractClassManager::start(config)
    }
}

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 85 at r30 (raw file):

    let manager = create_test_manager(native_config);

    assert_eq!(manager.cairo_native_run_config, native_config);

Why is it needed?

Code quote:

assert_eq!(manager.cairo_native_run_config, native_config);

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 115 at r30 (raw file):

#[should_panic(expected = "Compilation request channel is closed.")]
fn test_send_compilation_request_channel_disconnected() {
    let native_config = CairoNativeRunConfig { run_cairo_native: true, ..Default::default() };

I know that it's the default value but it's maybe better to be explicit.

Suggestion:

    // We use the channel to send native compilation requests. 
    let native_config = CairoNativeRunConfig { run_cairo_native: true, wait_on_native_compilation: false, channel_size:1 };

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 155 at r30 (raw file):

    let native_config = CairoNativeRunConfig {
        run_cairo_native: true,
        wait_on_native_compilation: true,

No?

Suggestion:

wait_on_native_compilation: false,

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 162 at r30 (raw file):

    let second_request = create_test_request();

    // Fill the channel (it can only hold 1 message)

Where can I see it? Where do you set the channel size to 1? Isn't it 0?

Code quote:

// Fill the channel (it can only hold 1 message)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 164 at r30 (raw file):

    // Fill the channel (it can only hold 1 message)
    manager.send_compilation_request(request);
    // Should log an error without panicking

Can we see the error?

Code quote:

// Should log an error without panicking

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 180 at r30 (raw file):

    manager.send_compilation_request(request);
}

Consider testing a happy flow of send_compilation_request with no wait on native and make sure the channel size was increased by 1.

crates/blockifier/src/test_utils/contracts.rs line 211 at r30 (raw file):

        let raw_sierra = self.get_raw_sierra();
        serde_json::from_str(&raw_sierra).unwrap()
    }

Why was it added? Where do you use it?

Code quote:

    pub fn get_contract_class(&self) -> CairoLangContractClass {
        let raw_sierra = self.get_raw_sierra();
        serde_json::from_str(&raw_sierra).unwrap()
    }

noaov1

Reviewed 1 of 13 files at r29.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 11 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 197 at r30 (raw file):

    let compiler_config = SierraCompilationConfig::default();
    let compiler = Arc::new(CommandLineCompiler::new(compiler_config));
    process_compilation_request(manager.contract_caches.clone(), compiler.clone(), request.clone());

Suggestion:

    let manager = create_test_manager(native_config);
    let (request, _native) = request_w_native;
    process_compilation_request(manager.contract_caches.clone(), manager.compiler.clone(), request.clone());

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 207 at r30 (raw file):

#[rstest]
fn test_run_compilation_worker() {

What exactly do we test here? How is it different from testingprocess_compilation_request?

Code quote:

fn test_run_compilation_worker() {

noaov1

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 13 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 50 at r30 (raw file):

fn create_test_request() -> CompilationRequest {
    // Question (AvivG): are we interested in testing other contracts?

No

Code quote:

// Question (AvivG): are we interested in testing other contracts?

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 53 at r30 (raw file):

    let test_contract = FeatureContract::TestContract(CairoVersion::Cairo1(RunnableCairo1::Native));
    create_test_request_from_contract(test_contract)
}

I think that it makes more sense to create the request using the casm.
Then you don't need the get_casm method.
As for the native:
You don't actually need it. You don't need to check here if the casm is the one that matches the native, you can simply test that you get some native contract.
WDYT?

Code quote:

fn create_test_request() -> CompilationRequest {
    // Question (AvivG): are we interested in testing other contracts?
    let test_contract = FeatureContract::TestContract(CairoVersion::Cairo1(RunnableCairo1::Native));
    create_test_request_from_contract(test_contract)
}

noaov1

Reviewed 1 of 14 files at r27, 9 of 13 files at r29, 3 of 4 files at r30.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 14 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager.rs line 217 at r30 (raw file):

            "Contract class with hash {} is already compiled to native. Skipping compilation.",
            class_hash
        );

Consider removing it.

Code quote:

        log::debug!(
            "Contract class with hash {} is already compiled to native. Skipping compilation.",
            class_hash
        );

meship-starkware

#3335 - PR that adds log testing to this PR

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 14 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @noaov1)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager.rs line 217 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Consider removing it.

Maybe adding it under the test config is a good indication for one of the logger tests. I can do this on my PR, which tests the logs.

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 155 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

No?

Also fixed in the next PR, actually aviv you can delete this test as this test only has meaning in the log test PR

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 162 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Where can I see it? Where do you set the channel size to 1? Isn't it 0?

It will be fixed in the next PR. My splitting was not perfect

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 164 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Can we see the error?

yes next PR

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 180 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Consider testing a happy flow of send_compilation_request with no wait on native and make sure the channel size was increased by 1.

I added a log, but that might be better

avi-starkware · 2025-01-23T14:21:06Z

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 53 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

I think that it makes more sense to create the request using the casm.
Then you don't need the get_casm method.
As for the native:
You don't actually need it. You don't need to check here if the casm is the one that matches the native, you can simply test that you get some native contract.
WDYT?

How can you create a request with the casm and not the sierra?
The request is a request to compile sierra to native

noaov1

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 14 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 53 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, avi-starkware (Avi Cohen) wrote…

How can you create a request with the casm and not the sierra?
The request is a request to compile sierra to native

You can get the sierra when using casm as the RunnableCairo1. I meant use:
let test_contract = FeatureContract::TestContract(CairoVersion::Cairo1(RunnableCairo1::Casm));

noaov1

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 14 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @meship-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 53 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

You can get the sierra when using casm as the RunnableCairo1. I meant use:
let test_contract = FeatureContract::TestContract(CairoVersion::Cairo1(RunnableCairo1::Casm));

I want to avoid using the new method get_casm.

avivg-starkware

Reviewable status: 3 of 16 files reviewed, 12 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @meship-starkware, and @noaov1)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager.rs line 217 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

Maybe adding it under the test config is a good indication for one of the logger tests. I can do this on my PR, which tests the logs.

Removing- @meship-starkware - make sure to add in the following PR #3335

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 50 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

No

Done.

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 53 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

I want to avoid using the new method get_casm.

Done, see my change (2 options - above)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 85 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Why is it needed?

A simple check to ensure the configurations saved to the manager were not changed by func 'start'.

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 115 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

I know that it's the default value but it's maybe better to be explicit.

Done

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 155 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

Also fixed in the next PR, actually aviv you can delete this test as this test only has meaning in the log test PR

Deleted this test- will be in pr #3335

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 162 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

It will be fixed in the next PR. My splitting was not perfect

Deleted this test- will be added in pr #3335

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 164 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

yes next PR

Deleted this test- will be added in pr #3335

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 180 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

I added a log, but that might be better

Deleted this test- will be in pr #3335
@meship-starkware, are you addressing Noa's request in the following PR, or should I?

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 207 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

What exactly do we test here? How is it different from testingprocess_compilation_request?

test_run_compilation_worker() ensures that the loop in run_compilation_worker() stops after the channel is closed and there are no more pending requests. do you think it's unnecessary?

crates/blockifier/src/state/global_cache.rs line 33 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Why only for tests?

I assumed @meship-starkware 's intention was not to add unnecessary attributes if there's no use for them - and as I only use it for tests - enough for me. This was my motivation for following the request. @meship-starkware @noaov1 WDYT?

crates/blockifier/src/test_utils/contracts.rs line 211 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Why was it added? Where do you use it?

Reverting.

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 74 at r30 (raw file):

        ContractClassManagerConfig { cairo_native_run_config: native_config, ..Default::default() };
    ContractClassManager::start(config)
}

Done

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 197 at r30 (raw file):

    let compiler_config = SierraCompilationConfig::default();
    let compiler = Arc::new(CommandLineCompiler::new(compiler_config));
    process_compilation_request(manager.contract_caches.clone(), compiler.clone(), request.clone());

Deleted this test- will be added in pr #3335 + copied this comment appropriately

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 51 at r31 (raw file):

    // Generate Casm, no need to match the native.
    let contract_class: ContractClass =

2 suggestions for avoiding the use of fn get_casm - preference? @noaov1

meship-starkware

Reviewed 12 of 13 files at r31, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 15 of 16 files reviewed, 12 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @avivg-starkware, and @noaov1)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 51 at r31 (raw file):

Previously, avivg-starkware wrote…

2 suggestions for avoiding the use of fn get_casm - preference? @noaov1

I would prefer that the test contract would be casm and that the function that would return the runnable class will create a new native contract class

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 37 at r31 (raw file):

        ContractClassManager::start(config)
    }
}

Move this to the contract class manager file see

sequencer/crates/blockifier/src/blockifier/config.rs

Line 101 in c29f208

    
           pub fn create_for_testing(run_cairo_native: bool, wait_on_native_compilation: bool) -> Self {

Code quote:

impl ContractClassManager {
    fn create_for_testing(native_config: CairoNativeRunConfig) -> Self {
        let config = ContractClassManagerConfig {
            cairo_native_run_config: native_config,
            ..Default::default()
        };
        ContractClassManager::start(config)
    }
}

meship-starkware

Reviewed 1 of 13 files at r31.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 12 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avivg-starkware and @noaov1)

meship-starkware

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 12 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avivg-starkware and @noaov1)

noaov1

Reviewed 1 of 13 files at r31, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avivg-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 114 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, avivg-starkware wrote…

@meship-starkware I see that in the following PR #3335 you rewrote the deleted func: test_send_compilation_request_channel_full()

for clarity, I'm returning the func here, could you delete it in the PR #3335 where it's rewritten ?

Summerizing the above:
process_compilation_request- tested in Meshi's PR (no need to distinguish between the different values of wait_on_native.
send_compilation_request-tested in Meshi's PR (need to distinguish between the different values of wait_on_native.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 207 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, avivg-starkware wrote…

test_run_compilation_worker() ensures that the loop in run_compilation_worker() stops after the channel is closed and there are no more pending requests. do you think it's unnecessary?

How exactly do you test it? Simply by checking that the test was finished?

crates/blockifier/src/state/global_cache.rs line 33 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, avivg-starkware wrote…

I assumed @meship-starkware 's intention was not to add unnecessary attributes if there's no use for them - and as I only use it for tests - enough for me. This was my motivation for following the request. @meship-starkware @noaov1 WDYT?

I see. As this is not a heavy trai, it can be derived either way. But I'm fine with this as well :)

noaov1

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avivg-starkware)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 114 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Summerizing the above:
process_compilation_request- tested in Meshi's PR (no need to distinguish between the different values of wait_on_native.
send_compilation_request-tested in Meshi's PR (need to distinguish between the different values of wait_on_native.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

.

avivg-starkware

Reviewable status: 2 of 17 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @meship-starkware, and @noaov1)

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 114 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

.

👍

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 207 at r30 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

How exactly do you test it? Simply by checking that the test was finished?

test removed

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 37 at r31 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

Move this to the contract class manager file see

sequencer/crates/blockifier/src/blockifier/config.rs

Line 101 in c29f208

pub fn create_for_testing(run_cairo_native: bool, wait_on_native_compilation: bool) -> Self {

moved to "struct_impls.rs"

crates/blockifier/src/state/contract_class_manager_test.rs line 51 at r31 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

I would prefer that the test contract would be casm and that the function that would return the runnable class will create a new native contract class

Done

noaov1

Reviewed 1 of 7 files at r32, 12 of 12 files at r33, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 13 of 17 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @meship-starkware)

meship-starkware

Reviewed 1 of 7 files at r32, 12 of 12 files at r33, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 13 of 17 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @noaov1)

meship-starkware

Reviewed 4 of 7 files at r32.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @avivg-starkware)

avivg-starkware marked this pull request as ready for review December 18, 2024 15:26

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch from 9098814 to b9b2fa2 Compare December 18, 2024 15:30

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch 9 times, most recently from 003b9ad to d6c6713 Compare December 24, 2024 15:12

avivg-starkware changed the base branch from main to avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config December 24, 2024 15:12

avivg-starkware mentioned this pull request Dec 24, 2024

chore(blockifier): add feild channel_size to contract_class_manager_config #2902

Merged

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config branch from 0adfb8c to e39a328 Compare December 25, 2024 13:02

avivg-starkware requested review from avi-starkware and noaov1 December 26, 2024 09:54

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config branch from e39a328 to 19dab86 Compare December 26, 2024 10:10

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch 2 times, most recently from f4dc017 to d8e38ab Compare December 26, 2024 10:17

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config branch from 19dab86 to 87a8788 Compare December 26, 2024 10:18

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch 2 times, most recently from aa7f26a to 5733e03 Compare December 26, 2024 10:27

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config branch from 87a8788 to b7e2924 Compare December 26, 2024 15:44

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch 2 times, most recently from a34a9e5 to 445cd55 Compare December 29, 2024 12:35

avivg-starkware changed the base branch from avivg/blockifier/add_channel_size_to_contact_manager_config to main-v0.13.4 December 29, 2024 12:35

noaov1 requested changes Dec 31, 2024

View reviewed changes

noaov1 requested changes Jan 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

noaov1 reviewed Jan 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

meship-starkware approved these changes Jan 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

noaov1 requested changes Jan 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

avivg-starkware changed the base branch from avivg/blockifier/add_casm_func_in_test_utils to graphite-base/2768 January 27, 2025 14:21

avivg-starkware force-pushed the graphite-base/2768 branch from 2d1c8d7 to c4d606e Compare January 27, 2025 14:21

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch from ce8f9a1 to 641f66e Compare January 27, 2025 14:21

avivg-starkware changed the base branch from graphite-base/2768 to main-v0.13.4 January 27, 2025 14:21

avivg-starkware commented Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

meship-starkware reviewed Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

meship-starkware approved these changes Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

noaov1 requested changes Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch 3 times, most recently from 11e9113 to 2c5dfd0 Compare January 28, 2025 11:30

avivg-starkware commented Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager

3ca8ea2

avivg-starkware force-pushed the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch from 2c5dfd0 to 3ca8ea2 Compare January 28, 2025 11:45

noaov1 approved these changes Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

meship-starkware reviewed Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

meship-starkware approved these changes Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

avivg-starkware merged commit ca983aa into main-v0.13.4 Jan 28, 2025
11 checks passed

avivg-starkware deleted the avivg/blockifier/test_contract_class_manager branch January 28, 2025 15:40

github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 30, 2025

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768

avivg-starkware commented Dec 18, 2024

reviewable-StarkWare commented Dec 18, 2024

avivg-starkware commented Dec 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

avi-starkware commented Jan 23, 2025

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

avivg-starkware left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

avivg-starkware left a comment

noaov1 left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

meship-starkware left a comment

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768

chore(blockifier): create unit tests for contract_class_manager #2768

Conversation

avivg-starkware commented Dec 18, 2024

reviewable-StarkWare commented Dec 18, 2024

avivg-starkware commented Dec 18, 2024 • edited Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 18, 2024 • edited Loading

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

avi-starkware commented Jan 23, 2025

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

avivg-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

avivg-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

noaov1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

avivg-starkware commented Dec 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading