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

Pass RollupParams as an argument in prover-client #559

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

prajwolrg
Copy link
Contributor

@prajwolrg prajwolrg commented Dec 24, 2024

Description

RollupParams was hardcoded in a file inside prover-client. This PR fixes that by passing it as an argument.

Type of Change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature/Enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality or enhances an existing one)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation update
  • Refactor
  • New or updated tests
  • Dependency Update

Notes to Reviewers

Checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my code.
  • I have commented my code where necessary.
  • I have updated the documentation if needed.
  • My changes do not introduce new warnings.
  • I have added tests that prove my changes are effective or that my feature works.
  • New and existing tests pass with my changes.

Related Issues

@prajwolrg prajwolrg requested review from a team as code owners December 24, 2024 07:29
@prajwolrg prajwolrg force-pushed the STR-784-prover-client-rollup-params branch from 21a42db to bb3b3e4 Compare December 24, 2024 07:30
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 24, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 61 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 57.37%. Comparing base (1dd0494) to head (505ee17).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
bin/prover-client/src/main.rs 0.00% 27 Missing ⚠️
bin/prover-client/src/operators/operator.rs 0.00% 10 Missing ⚠️
bin/prover-client/src/operators/cl_stf.rs 0.00% 8 Missing ⚠️
bin/prover-client/src/args.rs 0.00% 6 Missing ⚠️
bin/prover-client/src/operators/btc.rs 0.00% 6 Missing ⚠️
bin/prover-client/src/operators/checkpoint.rs 0.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #559      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   57.31%   57.37%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         309      308       -1     
  Lines       31510    31494      -16     
==========================================
+ Hits        18061    18069       +8     
+ Misses      13449    13425      -24     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
bin/prover-client/src/operators/mod.rs 0.00% <ø> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/operators/checkpoint.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/args.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/operators/btc.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/operators/cl_stf.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/operators/operator.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bin/prover-client/src/main.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

@delbonis delbonis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor comment on what types we're parsing.

bin/prover-client/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bin/prover-client/src/args.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@prajwolrg prajwolrg requested a review from delbonis December 26, 2024 05:24
Copy link
Contributor

@evgenyzdanovich evgenyzdanovich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice work, LGTM!

Copy link
Member

@storopoli storopoli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK 505ee17

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.

4 participants