refactor: encapsulate agglayer faucet and bridge in structs#2379
Closed
Farukest wants to merge 4 commits into0xMiden:nextfrom
Closed
refactor: encapsulate agglayer faucet and bridge in structs#2379Farukest wants to merge 4 commits into0xMiden:nextfrom
Farukest wants to merge 4 commits into0xMiden:nextfrom
Conversation
Add `AggLayerFaucet` and `AggLayerBridge` structs with `new()` constructors and `From<T> for AccountComponent` trait implementations. This follows the pattern established by `NetworkFungibleFaucet` and improves code maintainability by: - Encapsulating configuration in dedicated types - Using trait-based conversion instead of manual storage slot creation - Providing accessor methods for struct fields - Defining storage slot names as static constants The existing `create_agglayer_faucet_component` and `create_bridge_account_component` functions now delegate to these new types. Closes 0xMiden#2371
Farukest
force-pushed
the
feat/issue-2371-agglayer-structs
branch
from
4ff25f3 to
af9371e
Compare
Resolve merge conflict in lib.rs: - Keep struct-based implementation (AggLayerFaucet) over inline logic - This aligns with PR goal of encapsulating agglayer components in structs
Comment on lines
135
to
145
| impl From<AggLayerFaucet> for AccountComponent { | ||
| fn from(faucet: AggLayerFaucet) -> Self { | ||
| // Create network faucet metadata slot: [max_supply, decimals, token_symbol, 0] | ||
| let metadata_word = Word::new([ | ||
| faucet.max_supply, | ||
| Felt::from(faucet.decimals), | ||
| faucet.token_symbol.into(), | ||
| FieldElement::ZERO, | ||
| ]); | ||
| let metadata_slot = | ||
| StorageSlot::with_value(NetworkFungibleFaucet::metadata_slot().clone(), metadata_word); |
crates/miden-agglayer/src/lib.rs
Outdated
| /// # Panics | ||
| /// Panics if the token symbol is invalid or storage slot names are malformed. | ||
| /// Panics if the token symbol is invalid. | ||
| pub fn create_agglayer_faucet_component( |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible to replace this function with calls to AggLayerFaucet::new directly?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done @PhilippGackstatter 👍
removed create_agglayer_faucet_component and now using AggLayerFaucet::new directly in create_agglayer_faucet_builder
crates/miden-agglayer/src/lib.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
204
to
209
| impl From<AggLayerBridge> for AccountComponent { | ||
| fn from(_bridge: AggLayerBridge) -> Self { | ||
| let bridge_storage_slots = | ||
| vec![StorageSlot::with_empty_map(AggLayerBridge::bridge_slot().clone())]; | ||
|
|
||
| bridge_out_component(bridge_storage_slots) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might make sense to get rid of bridge_out_component and inline that logic here, but cc @mmagician for double checking.
Contributor
Author
|
All done @PhilippGackstatter need review. let me know if I miss something else. thanks |
Farukest
force-pushed
the
feat/issue-2371-agglayer-structs
branch
from
ce95977 to
49541ba
Compare
- Remove create_agglayer_faucet_component helper, use AggLayerFaucet::new directly - Inline bridge_out_component logic in From<AggLayerBridge> impl
Farukest
force-pushed
the
feat/issue-2371-agglayer-structs
branch
from
49541ba to
ff354f0
Compare
partylikeits1983
previously approved these changes
Feb 5, 2026
Contributor
partylikeits1983
left a comment
partylikeits1983
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, its just there are a few in flight PRs on agglayer branch(s) that will probably need to be merged into agglayer first, then agglayer into next before we should add this.
cc @mmagician
partylikeits1983
dismissed
their stale review
Will approve once other PRs land on agglayer. This looks good, just not quite ready to merge to next. Also agglayer related work is first merged to the agglayer branch for staging
mmagician
added
the
agglayer
Farukest
force-pushed
the
feat/issue-2371-agglayer-structs
branch
from
a9e083d to
dd6771a
Compare
Farukest
force-pushed
the
feat/issue-2371-agglayer-structs
branch
from
dd6771a to
d533563
Compare
Collaborator
|
superseded by #2371 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
AggLayerFaucetstruct withnew()constructor andFrom<AggLayerFaucet> for AccountComponentAggLayerBridgestruct withnew()constructor andFrom<AggLayerBridge> for AccountComponentLazyLockconstantscreate_agglayer_faucet_componentandcreate_bridge_account_componentto use new structsContext
This follows the pattern established by
NetworkFungibleFaucetin PR #2335, improving code maintainability by encapsulating configuration in dedicated types with trait-based conversion.Test plan
cargo +nightly fmtpassescargo clippy -p miden-agglayerpassescargo test -p miden-agglayerpassesCloses #2371