feat!: Support contracts with no constructor - #5175
Conversation
Benchmark resultsMetrics with a significant change:
Detailed resultsAll benchmarks are run on txs on the This benchmark source data is available in JSON format on S3 here. Values are compared against data from master at commit L2 block published to L1Each column represents the number of txs on an L2 block published to L1.
L2 chain processingEach column represents the number of blocks on the L2 chain where each block has 16 txs.
Circuits statsStats on running time and I/O sizes collected for every circuit run across all benchmarks.
Tree insertion statsThe duration to insert a fixed batch of leaves into each tree type.
MiscellaneousTransaction sizes based on how many contract classes are registered in the tx.
Transaction processing duration by data writes.
|
cf5f242 to
ecfead7
Compare
af09d7a to
44af89e
Compare
a0cfd89 to
9d95634
Compare
commented
Mar 13, 2024
|
Can you add a note to the Migration Notes page (docs/docs/misc/migration_notes.md) about the breaking change? |
The method was not idempotent as it was pushing capsules, which broke other calls that depended on capsules. Unclear why this popped up only now.
commented
Mar 13, 2024
|
@critesjosh done! |
fb2d7d7 to
62093a9
Compare
commented
Mar 13, 2024
Docs PreviewHey there! 👋 You can check your preview at https://65f228f93063433e92709c78--aztec-docs-dev.netlify.app |
Changes:
constructoris no longer an enshrined function name, it's now required to flag the constructor withaztec(initializer).isInitializerflag to contract artifactaztec(initializer)attribute, if there's more than one, pick one at random, preferring private onesinitializationHashof a contract instance is set to zerocc @AztecProtocol/devrel