Resolve arguments in inheritance specifiers and fix scope for expressions in storage layout specifiers #1291
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: bcb00c0 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated, but the definiens section looks scrambled
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Leading trivia makes the output look scrambled, but it seems to be ok.
Waiting for #1288 to be merged to add a similar rule for the expressions in storage layout specifiers. |
|
@ggiraldez #1288 has been merged. Thank you! |
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | |||
| uint constant BASE = 42; | |||
|
|
|||
| contract Base { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: splitting such tests into two (positive that should bind, and negative that shouldn't bind).
This will make it easier to review/detect bugs in the future.
| @@ -2,3 +2,7 @@ uint256 constant C1 = 0; | |||
|
|
|||
| contract X1 layout at C1 { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: splitting such tests into two (positive that should bind, and negative that shouldn't bind).
This will make it easier to review/detect bugs in the future.
This PR was opened by the [Changesets release](https://github.com/changesets/action) GitHub action. When you're ready to do a release, you can merge this and publish to npm yourself or [setup this action to publish automatically](https://github.com/changesets/action#with-publishing). If you're not ready to do a release yet, that's fine, whenever you add more changesets to main, this PR will be updated. # Releases ## @nomicfoundation/slang@1.1.0 ### Minor Changes - [#1288](#1288) [`2090ab8`](2090ab8) Thanks [@OmarTawfik](https://github.com/OmarTawfik)! - support Solidity `0.8.29` and [Custom Storage Layouts](https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/v0.8.29/contracts.html#custom-storage-layout): - `ContractDefinition` nodes will no longer have an optional `InheritanceSpecifier` child directly, but will hold a list of `ContractSpecifier` children - `ContractSpecifier` nodes have either `InheritanceSpecifier` or `StorageLayoutSpecifier` children - [#1265](#1265) [`2312260`](2312260) Thanks [@mjoerussell](https://github.com/mjoerussell)! - Add `LanguageUtils::infer_language_versions(source_code) -> Version[]` API, which will analyze version pragmas inside a source file, and return a list of supported language versions that they allow. This can be used to select a valid language version to use with the rest of Slang APIs. Please see the [Choosing a Solidity Version](https://nomicfoundation.github.io/slang/1.1.0/user-guide/04-getting-started/02-choosing-a-solidity-version/) guide for more information. ### Patch Changes - [#1291](#1291) [`da1f863`](da1f863) Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Resolve arguments to inheritance specifiers and expressions in storage layout specifiers using the contract's parent scope. Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Fix resolving identifiers in arguments to inheritance specifiers, eg.
contract Test is Base(SOME_CONSTANT) {}. Arguments are resolved in the parent scope of the contract, ie. the source unit lexical scope.Also fix that storage layout expressions should be resolved in the contract's parent scope, not the contract's lexical scope itself.
Added some snapshot test cases to verify that cycles in contract hierarchies and recursive structs are bound correctly, even though they are invalid in Solidity.
Closes #1289