-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 288
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
feat(aztec-noir): align public and private execution patterns #1515
Changes from 15 commits
4219b44
ccd42d8
cac043f
d6b4437
9b95458
d8f1700
b3c336d
d92fc4e
2447886
79c1e7a
0fa5c7a
5289f2b
25f90a1
b97c244
17b666c
106615a
e2dacf2
8c448f9
e56d3e5
1bf4a23
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ | ||
#include "c_bind.h" | ||
|
||
#include "function_leaf_preimage.hpp" | ||
#include "tx_request.hpp" | ||
|
||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is the cpp using a different formatter? Some of these files have different formats without other stuff changing. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yep, i think these changes came from adams commits where he was using clion as his ide There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Should the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. good question, im i suppose it exists within both rulesets |
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.
How come the ordering change in here? Was there a mismatch or was this to follow the structure of
historic_block_data
?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.
Ive made a followup pr that does some reorg to prevent structuring mistakes like this: #1567.
It can be merged into this one or run as a standalone pr. It was a big change so Ive broken it up