-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 138
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
Contract Update Validator #3069
Conversation
…act-upgrade-checker
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3069 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.65% 80.67% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 379 380 +1
Lines 91494 91743 +249
==========================================
+ Hits 73797 74018 +221
- Misses 15049 15069 +20
- Partials 2648 2656 +8
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
…e into sainati/contract-upgrade-checker
…e into sainati/contract-upgrade-checker
…e into sainati/contract-upgrade-checker
Cadence Benchstat comparisonThis branch with compared with the base branch onflow:master commit f4fdbc6 Collapsed results for better readability
|
fadbc8d
to
38c9977
Compare
Is this only for staged updates?
this may be storage breaking I guess.
related to this, what happens to existing fields like @FungibleToken.Vault types etc ? they need to be able to change to @{FungibleToken.Vault} no ? |
38c9977
to
ecb5e3c
Compare
Yes.
How come? do you have an example? |
If I had let's say: [{I}] and put inside A:I , now after update I can still validly keep [{I}] but it will contain A which not implementing I no? |
ahh I see. Thanks for flagging! |
Yes, correct. |
64f2274
to
9bc54ff
Compare
9bc54ff
to
67411cb
Compare
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.
Nice!
…ti/contract-upgrade-checker
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.
Great work!
Part of #2865
A more permissive contract upgrade validator for converting v0.42 contracts to v1.0
This includes:
R{I}
restricted type in a field annotation must be replaced with anR
type&T
reference type may be granted any set of entitlements less permissive than the actual set thatT
supports according to the entitlements migration.master
branchFiles changed
in the Github PR explorer