Skip to content

Comments

Add support for v1.6.0-alpha.4#9756

Merged
lucassaldanha merged 4 commits intoConsensys:masterfrom
jtraglia:spec-v1.6.0-alpha.4
Aug 14, 2025
Merged

Add support for v1.6.0-alpha.4#9756
lucassaldanha merged 4 commits intoConsensys:masterfrom
jtraglia:spec-v1.6.0-alpha.4

Conversation

@jtraglia
Copy link
Contributor

@jtraglia jtraglia commented Aug 8, 2025

PR Description

This PR adds support for the newest consensus-specs release:

There were some new SSZ tests. We can ignore the tests for progressive lists. The new Vector[boolean, N] tests are failing though, because we don't fully support this. I spent a little bit of time trying to figure it out, but I didn't love my solution so I think it would be best to let the team fix it. Here's some relevant code:

// vec_{element type}_{length}
private SszSchema<?> getElementSchema(final TestDefinition testDefinition) {
final String elementType = getElementType(testDefinition);
return switch (elementType) {
// bool is not a bit in this case, it's a full one byte boolean which we don't support
case "bool", "uint8" -> SszPrimitiveSchemas.BYTE_SCHEMA;

Feel free to take over this PR & commit to the branch. Or tell me what to do and I'll make the changes.

Some of the failing tests:

telegram-cloud-photo-size-1-4949479570306871032-y

An example of a failing test:

telegram-cloud-photo-size-1-4949479570306871038-y

The relevant consensus-specs PRs:

Also, no security concerns with this. The only instance of Vector[boolean, N] is in eip7732 here:

Documentation

  • I thought about documentation and added the doc-change-required label to this PR if updates are required.

Changelog

  • I thought about adding a changelog entry, and added one if I deemed necessary.

@lucassaldanha
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the PR @jtraglia! We'll try to look at it and add the missing bits :)

@jtraglia jtraglia force-pushed the spec-v1.6.0-alpha.4 branch from 36445d5 to 85dfc99 Compare August 13, 2025 03:18
@jtraglia
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lucassaldanha I've rebased this PR onto @zilm13's. Let's see if the reference tests pass. If they do pass, please merge Dmitrii's PR and mark this PR as ready for review.

@jtraglia jtraglia marked this pull request as ready for review August 13, 2025 03:53
@lucassaldanha lucassaldanha merged commit 6fd9d20 into Consensys:master Aug 14, 2025
19 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 14, 2025
@jtraglia jtraglia deleted the spec-v1.6.0-alpha.4 branch August 14, 2025 13:20
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants