refactor: Improve input validation in bootstrap.sh and refactor bit_traits.rs #9406
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
- Refactored the BitsQueryable trait to avoid code duplication for numeric types. - Implemented the get_msb function using the leading_zeros() method for better efficiency. - Ensured compatibility with u8, u16, u32, u64, u128, and usize through a generalized implementation. - Maintained individual implementations for FieldElement and MemoryAddress to prevent type-related issues.
- Enhanced the input validation logic for the 'clean' command. - Now accepts various forms of confirmation such as 'y', 'Y', 'yes', and 'YES'. - This change makes the script more user-friendly and less prone to input errors.
fcarreiro
reviewed
Oct 25, 2024
fcarreiro
changed the title
|
Hi Cypherpepe, this PR does not build: https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/runs/32359062333 |
- Removed the blanket implementation of the `BitsQueryable` trait for all types `T: Into<u128> + Copy`, which was causing a conflict with the existing implementation for `FieldElement`. - Added explicit implementations of the `BitsQueryable` trait for primitive integer types (`u8`, `u16`, `u32`, `u64`, `u128`, `usize`) using the `impl_bits_queryable_for_integers!` macro. - This change resolves the compilation error related to conflicting trait implementations and makes the code more robust against future changes.
|
Hi, I've removed the universal implementation and instead provided explicit implementations for the primitive integer types using a macro. This avoids the conflict with |
fcarreiro
reviewed
Nov 6, 2024
avm-transpiler/src/bit_traits.rs
Outdated
| @@ -65,19 +27,27 @@ impl BitsQueryable for MemoryAddress { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| macro_rules! impl_bits_queryable_for_integers { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've consulted with a few people and we think we prefer the explicit BitsQueryable implementations instead of the macro. The rest looks good and still valuable (if small).
Could you make this changes and merge master? Then I can duplicate the PR again, run CI and if it passes we merge.
|
@fcarreiro, I've made the changes you requested:
|
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.
bootstrap.shto accept various forms of confirmation such as 'y', 'Y', 'yes', and 'YES'.bit_traits.rsto reduce code duplication and improve efficiency:leading_zeros()to optimize theget_msbfunction.BitsQueryabletrait for numeric types, reducing the need for multiple implementations.FieldElementandMemoryAddressto prevent type-related issues.