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

MSFDG: adapt AttackV2 and StepV2 functions in op-challenger2 and alphabet E2E test #105

Open
wants to merge 24 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dajuguan
Copy link

Description:

  • Adapt AttackV2 and StepV2 functions in op-challenger2
  • Add tests cased for the above functions in op-challenger2/game/fault/solver/solver_test.go and op-challenger2/game/fault/solver/game_solver_test.go
  • Integrate op-challenger2 and finish alphabet E2E test

Tests

  • op-challenger2: all tests passed
cd op-challenger2
go test ./...
  • alphabet game E2E: all tests passed
cd op-e2e2
go test -run '^(TestOutputAlphabetGame_ChallengerWins|TestOutputAlphabetGame_ReclaimBond|TestOutputAlphabetGame_ValidOutputRoot|TestChallengerCompleteExhaustiveDisputeGame|TestOutputAlphabetGame_FreeloaderEarnsNothing|TestHighestActedL1BlockMetric)$' [github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-e2e2/faultproofs](http://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/op-e2e2/faultproofs)

JustXxx and others added 24 commits November 2, 2024 20:15
1. rename addLocalData to addLocalData2 to avoid conflicting in tx.Pack
2. fix subValues at splitDepth+nbits must be 1
@blockchaindevsh
Copy link
Collaborator

blockchaindevsh commented Dec 2, 2024

The description is too short for such a large change set IMO, could you elaborate in more detail so that the review can be easier?

@dajuguan
Copy link
Author

dajuguan commented Dec 2, 2024

The description is too short for such a large change set IMO, could you elaborate in more detail so that the review can be easier?

Considering the extensive context, it might be better to split the changes into multiple PRs during a future rebase. For now, I suggest focusing on reviewing cosmetic aspects like naming and variable conventions, as that seems more feasible.

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.

3 participants