build: impl mock test utils

[AvivYossef-starkware]

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 70.54%. Comparing base (0b1ec9d) to head (6d9b95d).

Additional details and impacted files

@@                     Coverage Diff                     @@
##           aviv/create_mock_test_leaf     #314   +/-   ##
===========================================================
  Coverage                       70.54%   70.54%           
===========================================================
  Files                              38       38           
  Lines                            2091     2091           
  Branches                         2091     2091           
===========================================================
  Hits                             1475     1475           
  Misses                            546      546           
  Partials                           70       70           

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

[AvivYossef-starkware]

• refactor: use mock test utils in update skeleton tests #320
• refactor: use mock test utils in filled tree test #319
• refactor: use mock leaf in create tree test #316
• build: impl mock test utils #314 👈
• refactor: remove dependency between storage and starknet prefix #308
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @AvivYossef-starkware and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[github-actions]

Benchmark movements:
tree_computation_flow performance improved 😺
tree_computation_flow time: [33.451 ms 33.471 ms 33.492 ms]
change: [-4.7591% -3.4131% -2.2431%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
4 (4.00%) high mild

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r2, 7 of 7 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @AvivYossef-starkware)

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 26 at r3 (raw file):

use rstest::{fixture, rstest};
#[derive(Debug, PartialEq, Clone, Copy, Default, Eq)]
pub(crate) struct MockLeaf(pub(crate) Felt);

newline after uses

Suggestion:

use rstest::{fixture, rstest};

#[derive(Debug, PartialEq, Clone, Copy, Default, Eq)]
pub(crate) struct MockLeaf(pub(crate) Felt);

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 32 at r3 (raw file):

        StorageValue(self.0.to_bytes_be().to_vec())
    }
    fn get_prefix(&self) -> Vec<u8> {

newline between function impls

Suggestion:

    }

    fn get_prefix(&self) -> Vec<u8> {

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 70 at r3 (raw file):

            .0;
        Ok(Self(leaf_val))
    }

how does this differ from the default implementation?
if it doesn't, you should be able to just delete this

Code quote:

    fn from_modifications(
        index: &NodeIndex,
        leaf_modifications: Arc<LeafModifications<Self>>,
    ) -> LeafResult<Self> {
        let leaf_val = leaf_modifications
            .get(index)
            .expect("Leaf not found in modifications")
            .0;
        Ok(Self(leaf_val))
    }

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 75 at r3 (raw file):

generate_trie_config!(OriginalSkeletonMockTrieConfig, MockLeaf);

struct MockHash;

it's not a hash, it's a hash function

Suggestion:

MockHashFunction

[AvivYossef-starkware]

Reviewable status: 4 of 9 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 26 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

newline after uses

Done.

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 32 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

newline between function impls

Done.

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 70 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

how does this differ from the default implementation?
if it doesn't, you should be able to just delete this

I haven't noticed that we have one.

---

crates/committer/src/patricia_merkle_tree/internal_test_utils.rs line 75 at r3 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

it's not a hash, it's a hash function

Done.

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 5 of 5 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @AvivYossef-starkware)