Skip to content

accounts/abi: error when packing negative values in unsigned types #31790#1422

Merged
gzliudan merged 1 commit intoXinFinOrg:dev-upgradefrom
gzliudan:prevent-pack-negative-uint
Sep 3, 2025
Merged

accounts/abi: error when packing negative values in unsigned types #31790#1422
gzliudan merged 1 commit intoXinFinOrg:dev-upgradefrom
gzliudan:prevent-pack-negative-uint

Conversation

@gzliudan
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@gzliudan gzliudan commented Sep 3, 2025

Proposed changes

Ref: ethereum#31790

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to XDC network?
Put an in the boxes that apply

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
  • Regular KTLO or any of the maintaince work. e.g code style
  • CICD Improvement

Impacted Components

Which part of the codebase this PR will touch base on,

Put an in the boxes that apply

  • Consensus
  • Account
  • Network
  • Geth
  • Smart Contract
  • External components
  • Not sure (Please specify below)

Checklist

Put an in the boxes once you have confirmed below actions (or provide reasons on not doing so) that

  • This PR has sufficient test coverage (unit/integration test) OR I have provided reason in the PR description for not having test coverage
  • Provide an end-to-end test plan in the PR description on how to manually test it on the devnet/testnet.
  • Tested the backwards compatibility.
  • Tested with XDC nodes running this version co-exist with those running the previous version.
  • Relevant documentation has been updated as part of this PR
  • N/A

…hereum#31790

This is an alternative approach to
ethereum#31607 , that doesn't break
backwards-compatibility with abigen.

Note that this does change the behavior of `Argument.Pack`: previously,
packing negative values for a `uint` parameter would cause them to be
represented in signed binary representation via two's complement. Now,
it will fail explicitly in this case.

However, I don't see a reason to support this functionality. The ABI
already explicitly supports signed integers. There's no reason that a
smart contract author would choose to store signed values in a `uint`
afaict.

---------

Co-authored-by: MariusVanDerWijden <m.vanderwijden@live.de>
@gzliudan gzliudan merged commit b6f28ef into XinFinOrg:dev-upgrade Sep 3, 2025
12 checks passed
@gzliudan gzliudan deleted the prevent-pack-negative-uint branch September 3, 2025 07:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants