refactor(store): clean up Memory, make mcopy pure #1153
Merged
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
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 0cf1a50 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 17 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
dk1a
commented
Jul 13, 2023
Comment on lines
+439
to
+441
| assembly { | ||
| mstore(memoryPointer, dynamicDataLength) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for just mstore I think using assembly directly is clearer, and this method was only used in this 1 place
holic
approved these changes
Jul 13, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
fixes #1086
fixes part of #1133
this significantly ups the gas cost of mcopy and consequently
Slice.toBytes(), but we shouldn't need this memory copying in the first place, which I'll address in a later PR(it doesn't affect much, only some dynamic fields)