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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

SSTORE net gas metering support #127

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 3, 2018
Merged

SSTORE net gas metering support #127

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 6 additions & 1 deletion include/evmc/evmc.h
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -450,7 +450,12 @@ enum evmc_storage_status
/**
* A storage item has been deleted: X -> 0.
*/
EVMC_STORAGE_DELETED = 3
EVMC_STORAGE_DELETED = 3,

/**
* A storage item has been modified after being modified before: X -> Y -> Z.
*/
EVMC_STORAGE_MODIFIED_DIRTY = 4
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why not place this next to MODIFIED? And why not just name it MODIFIED_AGAIN ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

cc @gumb0 @chfast

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  1. The EVMC_STORAGE_MODIFIED_AGAIN is better name indeed, we could change it. I just wanted if the EIP mentions this case as dirty. We could go even as far as proposing a change to the EIP.

  2. In some sense it is closer to EVMC_STORAGE_MODIFIED but also describes a case that was historically added later. I was thinking about this but both options are fine for me.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The EVMC_STORAGE_MODIFIED_AGAIN is better name indeed, we could change it.

How about changing it before ABI6 is released?

In some sense it is closer to EVMC_STORAGE_MODIFIED but also describes a case that was historically added later.

I think since this is added a breaking change I'd add it next to it, with the values pushed down.

If this enum would have been around for months I may be on a different opinion, but not in this case.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Created an issue to track this: #129

};


Expand Down