Backwards compatibility for bytecode comparison #10679
Merged
Conversation
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
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
6333cd8 to
a46f225
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
3 times, most recently
from
d0b3402 to
429c711
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
5 times, most recently
from
5f41135 to
27bdb4a
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
a46f225 to
0ff9a2b
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
27bdb4a to
b5951da
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
0ff9a2b to
6501925
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
b5951da to
eb081ad
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
6501925 to
998ee0c
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
eb081ad to
5e70dd1
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
4 times, most recently
from
249416c to
8769936
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
7f879cd to
8d34c08
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
8769936 to
83cd9dc
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
8d34c08 to
dd95291
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a20f654 to
7d23c0d
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
cli-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
dd95291 to
3b03bc7
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
08a20f4 to
087be9b
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
087be9b to
abdea8c
Compare
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
abdea8c to
6d3d6bf
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
#10676 has just been merged so I'm marking this a ready for review. |
hrkrshnn
reviewed
Feb 1, 2021
Contributor
hrkrshnn
left a comment
hrkrshnn
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally looks good. I'll do one more review later.
Comment on lines
16
to
21
| CONTRACT_SEPARATOR_PATTERN = re.compile(r'^ *======= +(?:(?P<file_name>.+) *:)? *(?P<contract_name>[^:]+) +======= *$', re.MULTILINE) | ||
| BYTECODE_REGEX = re.compile(r'^ *Binary: *\n(?P<bytecode>.*[0-9a-f$_]+.*)$', re.MULTILINE) | ||
| METADATA_REGEX = re.compile(r'^ *Metadata: *\n *(?P<metadata>\{.*\}) *$', re.MULTILINE) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do these regex have to change?
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The old regex was enough to handle the current output but in older versions there are some variations:
- File name is not present in the
=======header on 0.4.8 and earlier. - There are some minor differences in whitespace between versions. Not as big at the change in the regex would imply but I just made it handle extra whitespace in all reasonable places.
- On older versions bytecode or metadata sections in the output are sometimes empty. The original regex just assumes that the next line after the
Bytecode:contains the bytecode and it grabs the metadata header if that happens to be empty so I had to make it more strict.
There are test cases on sample output from 0.4.8 and 0.4.0 to make sure they're parsed correctly and also a synthetic case that checks what happens when the sections are empty or if there is extra whitespace.
…agma stripping and only disabling the SMT checker
…compiler versions
…bug in solc 0.6.0/0.6.1
… that do not support it - Before 0.4.3 the option was unavailable but ignored. - Between 0.4.3 and 0.4.6 an attempt to use that option causes an error.
…tion instead of failing - Our v0.4.11 release raises an exception on some LLL snippets containing returnlll (extracted from its end-to-end tests). - The report comparison will fail anyway because emscripten prints an abort code to stdout in that case but at least we'll be able to continue if we're comparing multiple versions.
cameel
force-pushed
the
backwards-compatibility-for-bytecode-comparison
branch
from
6d3d6bf to
7bebcb7
Compare
chriseth
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Depends on #10676. Don't merge until that PR is merged!It's ondevelopnow.This is a set of workarounds for #10183, to make
prepare_report.pyandprepare_report.jswork with older versions of the compiler:--metadataoption was not supported. Up to 0.4.4 it was ignored but on 0.4.5 and 0.4.6 it cause an error so I added a step to detect that and prevent the script from using it.