Fix warnings on contract and contractimpl macros #1344
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
dmkozh
reviewed
Sep 20, 2024
dmkozh
approved these changes
Sep 20, 2024
leighmcculloch
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2024
### What Fix and disable warnings on contract and contractimpl macros for misformatted item names, and missing fns. ### Why Starting with the last release warnings started to display on the contract and contractimpl macros because of generated code not following the naming conventions for some items. In one case it is easier to fix the naming convention, and so that is what was done. In the other case it is easier to silence the warning, and so that is what was done. One of the warnings was about a missing function. In this case I think there's an issue with rust-analyzer and how we were generating two dependent parts of code different ways. In one are we were always generating the code feature gated, in the other we were generating it only based on the feature. Rust-analyzer doesn't rebuild proc-macros frequently, and so I think caching of generated code that then had the feature off was to blame. ### Backporting This change should be backported to the 21 versions as a patch on 21.7 after merging to main. (cherry picked from commit 1367be1)
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
### What Change two locations of the soroban-sdk-macros which were gated on the contract crates `testutils` feature, to be gated on the SDK's `testutils` feature. ### Why Recently I introduced a bug into the sdk across two changes: - #1344 - #1336 The bug was that I changed how some code was gated to be gated on whether the contract's `testutils` feature was enabled, rather than on the SDKs. Sometime ago in the following issue I changed how all of a contract's testutils are enabled/disabled, by being enabled/disabled by the SDK's testutils feature: - #1301 That change was good, it fixed a horrid issue with testing contracts where you could have some contracts in testutils mode, and others not, leading to strange errors when importing native contracts for testing. However, when I worked on the two issues above, I inadvertently forgot that we had changed the structure of how testutils code got enabled, and I introduced across those two PRs two new locations where we followed the old pattern and gated on the contract feature set, not the SDKs. For most users this will have presented no issues because there all of these testutilities are always enabled in a contract's own tests. This masked the issue in all of our own tests, but broke setups like fuzzing where the contract gets imported. All of our fuzz projects unfortunately don't currently build the fuzz components, and so this got missed until someone (me) tried to use them. ### Known limitations This change doesn't introduce a test to detect this type of breakage. I think the way we can detect this in the future is have our pre-existing test vector build as part of CI. This issue is tracking that follow up work: - #1363 ### Merging This fix is targeting main, but we need a similar fix to target v21, because part of this bug was introduced into v21.7.2. Once this change merges to main, I will partially cherry-pick it into a backport patch release.
leighmcculloch
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
### What Change two locations of the soroban-sdk-macros which were gated on the contract crates `testutils` feature, to be gated on the SDK's `testutils` feature. ### Why Recently I introduced a bug into the sdk across two changes: - #1344 - #1336 The bug was that I changed how some code was gated to be gated on whether the contract's `testutils` feature was enabled, rather than on the SDKs. Sometime ago in the following issue I changed how all of a contract's testutils are enabled/disabled, by being enabled/disabled by the SDK's testutils feature: - #1301 That change was good, it fixed a horrid issue with testing contracts where you could have some contracts in testutils mode, and others not, leading to strange errors when importing native contracts for testing. However, when I worked on the two issues above, I inadvertently forgot that we had changed the structure of how testutils code got enabled, and I introduced across those two PRs two new locations where we followed the old pattern and gated on the contract feature set, not the SDKs. For most users this will have presented no issues because there all of these testutilities are always enabled in a contract's own tests. This masked the issue in all of our own tests, but broke setups like fuzzing where the contract gets imported. All of our fuzz projects unfortunately don't currently build the fuzz components, and so this got missed until someone (me) tried to use them. ### Known limitations This change doesn't introduce a test to detect this type of breakage. I think the way we can detect this in the future is have our pre-existing test vector build as part of CI. This issue is tracking that follow up work: - #1363 ### Merging This fix is targeting main, but we need a similar fix to target v21, because part of this bug was introduced into v21.7.2. Once this change merges to main, I will partially cherry-pick it into a backport patch release. (cherry picked from commit 1eaa5d8)
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.
What
Fix and disable warnings on contract and contractimpl macros for misformatted item names, and missing fns.
Why
Starting with the last release warnings started to display on the contract and contractimpl macros because of generated code not following the naming conventions for some items.
In one case it is easier to fix the naming convention, and so that is what was done.
In the other case it is easier to silence the warning, and so that is what was done.
One of the warnings was about a missing function. In this case I think there's an issue with rust-analyzer and how we were generating two dependent parts of code different ways. In one are we were always generating the code feature gated, in the other we were generating it only based on the feature. Rust-analyzer doesn't rebuild proc-macros frequently, and so I think caching of generated code that then had the feature off was to blame.
Backporting
This change should be backported to the 21 versions as a patch on 21.7 after merging to main.