Skip to content
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: enable clarity-wasm in clarity check #1355

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 20, 2024

Conversation

hugocaillard
Copy link
Collaborator

@hugocaillard hugocaillard commented Feb 14, 2024

Description

$ clarinet check --enable-clarity-wasm

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 41 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (1d084ef) 40.64% compared to head (a243d14) 41.19%.

Files Patch % Lines
components/clarinet-cli/src/frontend/cli.rs 0.00% 40 Missing ⚠️
...omponents/stacks-network/src/chains_coordinator.rs 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1355      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    40.64%   41.19%   +0.55%     
===========================================
  Files           86       86              
  Lines        31591    31625      +34     
===========================================
+ Hits         12841    13029     +188     
+ Misses       18750    18596     -154     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@hugocaillard hugocaillard force-pushed the feat/enable-clarity-wasm-in-clarinet-check branch from 5cbb298 to 8bf99bf Compare February 16, 2024 14:28
@hugocaillard hugocaillard force-pushed the feat/enable-clarity-wasm-in-clarinet-check branch from 8bf99bf to 5120592 Compare February 19, 2024 15:22
@hugocaillard hugocaillard marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2024 15:22
@hugocaillard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks @Acaccia for the fix on clarity-wasm 💪

Copy link
Contributor

@MicaiahReid MicaiahReid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me! I didn't know of any contract code that would yield a different result for the interpreted vs wasm-compiled routes, but I timed running clarinet check with and without --enable-clarity-wasm, and it's a bit slower with clarity wasm enabled, so I figured it must be doing something 😅

@hugocaillard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks @MicaiahReid
It's getting difficult to find trivial examples that fail. Here's one that is failing with the current clarity-wasm version.

(define-map mp {x: uint} {y: (list 20 (response (buff 21) int)) })

(map-insert mp
  {x: u306845443603200851488318099 }
  {y: (list
    (ok 0xac50891b72b93b496d25caedc508e9f65b98727ee6)
    (ok 0x53f588bdbb3495aee902cdaa863d31e2dc42b8215d)
    (ok 0xccc90ca2258d144e11cd32c453599bd36d039120e6)
    (ok 0x032ee22a2028f05e537ebab0eae0fa2b8fc4ba8d1d)
  )}
)

@hugocaillard hugocaillard merged commit abc3458 into develop Feb 20, 2024
19 checks passed
@hugocaillard hugocaillard deleted the feat/enable-clarity-wasm-in-clarinet-check branch February 20, 2024 14:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Run clarity-wasm in clarinet check
2 participants