-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
fix(forge) hotfix - filter tests #5822
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
fix(forge) hotfix - filter tests #5822
Conversation
Evalir
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm, are we sure this fixes filtering? is anything else broken right now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
needs fixing on tests—let's make sure this works very well before merging
|
Yeah @Evalir , |
|
@iFrostizz happy to jettison it but let's do it in another PR—don't wanna mix a hotfix with removing a feature :) one thing at a time |
|
So just to make it clear is it okay if |
|
hmm, i think it requires a bit of discussion with the community as well as this is technically a breaking change—is it possible to fix up forge debug first? @iFrostizz |
|
can you elaborate on what is broken and why dropping forge debug is a good idea from your pov? @iFrostizz |
|
@Evalir good idea, let's fix this stuff first |
|
We can just flatten |
|
@iFrostizz i believe that should be good enough—will we include this in this PR? |
Evalir
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the fix! Can you confirm you've QA'd this and works?
Also, unrelated, but I'd recommend enabling git commit signing—it's more secure and a good practice.
|
@Evalir just dropped the stuff, let's see how you find it. |
look good! |
|
The last commit just makes |
|
friendly ping @iFrostizz |
This reverts commit f1af410.
|
Yep, sorry @Evalir ! |
|
So now, |
|
wait fuzzing is still broken for |
|
@Evalir I get it, script's |
|
Yep, I think this makes sense—no reason why would you fuzz in a script! thank you, will review soon! |
|
@mattsse friendly ping |
mattsse
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have introduced a bug that didn't filtered the tests correctly using the construct.
I want to do these always in two steps, fix first then refactor.
this is not really easy to review because unclear what the fix is and what refactor.
| /// Max priority fee per gas for EIP1559 transactions. | ||
| #[clap( | ||
| long, | ||
| env = "ETH_PRIORITY_GAS_PRICE", | ||
| value_parser = parse_ether_value, | ||
| value_name = "PRICE" | ||
| )] | ||
| pub priority_gas_price: Option<U256>, | ||
|
|
||
| /// Use legacy transactions instead of EIP1559 ones. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// This is auto-enabled for common networks without EIP1559. | ||
| #[clap(long)] | ||
| pub debug: bool, | ||
| pub legacy: bool, | ||
|
|
||
| /// Broadcasts the transactions. | ||
| #[clap(long)] | ||
| pub broadcast: bool, | ||
|
|
||
| /// Skips on-chain simulation. | ||
| #[clap(long)] | ||
| pub skip_simulation: bool, | ||
|
|
||
| /// Relative percentage to multiply gas estimates by. | ||
| #[clap(long, short, default_value = "130")] | ||
| pub gas_estimate_multiplier: u64, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm having trouble understanding why changing all these fields is necessary in order to fix the referenced issue?
this PR should then fix this bug, could you please split this into two, because rn it looks like this pr does multiple things |
|
but maybe @Evalir has already checked it, in which case I'm okay with merging, codewise this looks fine, but the impl figment macro is now no longer accurate |
|
@mattsse im feeling uneasy about this PR due to the same reasons you mentioned—I'm in favor of splitting to make changes smaller and ideally also not screw up the figment macro |
|
Closing, this was fixed recently in another PR. |
Hotfix for #5753
Closes #5563
I have introduced a bug that didn't filtered the tests correctly using the construct.
Fixes and ~slight refactor so that won't repeat cause we don't depend on 2 instance of the same code.
Also we don't need to turn off debug traces, what I initially thought was a big performance penalty was just proptest shrinking while it wasn't ran in
--releasemode