Anchor upgrade#62
Conversation
|
Hi, I think it would be best if you fork this repo. We would happily add it to the README as a starting point for people who want to make their own deployment with the newest version. Hope you understand, we don't have time to review this as we are happy with our own deployment and wouldn't like to touch it unless absolutely necessary. |
noted sir. as far as the attached image is concerned, it is generated by the cargo builds to remove any compilation issues.
|
This change doesn't introduce any new functionality. It only upgrades the project to the latest If you still think this should not be merged please let us know and we would fork it |
|
just worried there is definitely change in there that I wouldn't be able to sign off in short time, specifically in the test suite, if you want it merged you would need to rework those parts. i triggered a CI run, so all of the formal checks are run at least once and you get an idea for what needs to change apart from that. |
| addin_program_id, | ||
| processor!(voter_stake_registry::entry), | ||
| // processor!(voter_stake_registry::entry), | ||
| None, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why would you not bind the entry point?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
new anchor complains due to mismatched types.
solana-program inherits the entry from the .so if the .so files exists.
I couldn't find another way to adding the builtin_function.
| // &authority.pubkey(), | ||
| // &payer.pubkey(), | ||
| // &authority.pubkey(), | ||
| // ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how come this is no longer needed? in general we prefer not to keep unused code in comments
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sorry I missed this, the add_signatory() has changed in spl-gov, newer tests did not have it when creating a proposal.
I readded it with the new version of the instruction.
| assert_eq!(deposit.is_used, true); | ||
| assert_eq!(deposit.amount_deposited_native, 12000); | ||
| assert_eq!(deposit.amount_initially_locked_native, 12000); | ||
| let amount_deposited_native = deposit.amount_deposited_native; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please keep the diff minimal when possible
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we have to have this due to zero_copy(unsafe) otherwise pointers would give undefined behavior. we need to copy the field to a local variable.
|
i also would appreciate a comment if this code is 100% backwards compatible and how that was verified. the zero copy implementation did change substantially in v27 afaik |
please note that soteria has been deprecated sec3 has moved to a newer version called |
3 participants
gm,
Hope this is what is needed.
main notes:
zero_copy(unsafe)is used so that the Voter could have the same old behavior.close_voter()andregistrar.max_vote_weight()is_initialized()which includes the old discriminator. and the method for deserializing the VoterWeightRecord has this check. this dictates that it would work. I'm not entirely sure tho.Regards,
miester