Get features from all targets #2570
Conversation
crates/forge/tests/data/targets/custom_target_custom_names/metadata.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/scarb-api/src/lib.rs
Outdated
| // TODO use const | ||
| let base_artifacts = contracts_paths | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .find(|paths| paths.test_type == Some("integration".to_string())) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this prioritize None i.e. contracts from starknet-contract? 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Logic was changed. But there's no case where we have contracts both from "starknet-contract" and from "integration". It's either first if we build with scarb build or the second when using scarb build --test.
crates/scarb-api/src/lib.rs
Outdated
| for artifact in other_artifacts { | ||
| let artifact = load_contracts_artifacts_and_source_sierra_paths(&artifact.path)?; | ||
| for (key, value) in artifact { | ||
| base_artifacts.entry(key).or_insert(value); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do I understand correctly, this is only meant to be a fallback?
If so, isn't it extremely wasteful, that it compiles all contract files with USC before checking if you even need them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Btw. I still think it should be possible to compile all contract files in parallel with multiple usc processes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, this part is not optimised very well. Imo worth a separate task
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can use par_iter to compile these in parallel, it should be safe.
Co-authored-by: Piotr Magiera <[email protected]>
…ts' into 2568-get-features-from-all-targets
| .other_files | ||
| .par_iter() | ||
| .map(load_contracts_artifacts_and_source_sierra_paths) | ||
| .collect::<Result<Vec<_>>>()?; | ||
|
|
||
| for artifact in compiled_artifacts { | ||
| for (key, value) in artifact { | ||
| base_artifacts.entry(key).or_insert(value); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It still compiles those files, just to most probably discard them anyway? 👀
Can't we check if we need specific contract artifact without compiling it first?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, I think we can do that. I'll change it so it only compiles artifacts which names' didn't occur before.
Closes #2568
Closes #2567
Introduced changes
Checklist
CHANGELOG.md