feat!: using WithHash<T> in SharedMutable + fixing slot allocation

[benesjan]

With the introduction of WithHash<T> it made sense to use it in SharedMutable as well. Given that I was dealing with storage I decided to tackle other SharedMutable related issues.

Fixes #5492
Fixes #5491

[benesjan]

• feat!: using WithHash<T> in SharedMutable + fixing slot allocation #11716 👈 (View in Graphite)
• feat!: introduce WithHash<T> + use it in PublicImmutable #8022
• master

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[AztecBot]

Docs Preview

Hey there! 👋 You can check your preview at https://67a4aed4fdbdfc1bf677d60a--aztec-docs-dev.netlify.app

[github-actions]

Changes to public function bytecode sizes

Generated at commit: 57105b27bf97c5f9ac5198b564db4bf5f2150bba, compared to commit: 7820cb7b373370f16fed249beed07809da6998cc

🧾 Summary (100% most significant diffs)

Program	Bytecode size in bytes (+/-)	%
TokenBlacklist::transfer_public	-135 ✅	-2.43%
TokenBlacklist::shield	-157 ✅	-2.80%
TokenBlacklist::burn_public	-148 ✅	-2.99%
TokenBlacklist::public_dispatch	-1,861 ✅	-7.27%
TokenBlacklist::mint_private	-318 ✅	-8.57%
TokenBlacklist::mint_public	-338 ✅	-9.57%
TokenBlacklist::get_roles	-333 ✅	-12.31%
Auth::public_dispatch	-1,787 ✅	-18.85%
TokenBlacklist::constructor	-1,685 ✅	-25.05%
TokenBlacklist::update_roles	-1,748 ✅	-27.24%
Auth::set_authorized_delay	-1,889 ✅	-38.10%
Auth::set_authorized	-1,887 ✅	-38.83%
Auth::get_authorized	-883 ✅	-47.68%
Auth::get_scheduled_authorized	-889 ✅	-50.68%
Auth::get_authorized_delay	-1,299 ✅	-65.61%

---

Full diff report 👇

Program	Bytecode size in bytes (+/-)	%
TokenBlacklist::transfer_public	5,430 (-135)	-2.43%
TokenBlacklist::shield	5,445 (-157)	-2.80%
TokenBlacklist::burn_public	4,807 (-148)	-2.99%
TokenBlacklist::public_dispatch	23,725 (-1,861)	-7.27%
TokenBlacklist::mint_private	3,394 (-318)	-8.57%
TokenBlacklist::mint_public	3,194 (-338)	-9.57%
TokenBlacklist::get_roles	2,372 (-333)	-12.31%
Auth::public_dispatch	7,693 (-1,787)	-18.85%
TokenBlacklist::constructor	5,041 (-1,685)	-25.05%
TokenBlacklist::update_roles	4,669 (-1,748)	-27.24%
Auth::set_authorized_delay	3,069 (-1,889)	-38.10%
Auth::set_authorized	2,973 (-1,887)	-38.83%
Auth::get_authorized	969 (-883)	-47.68%
Auth::get_scheduled_authorized	865 (-889)	-50.68%
Auth::get_authorized_delay	681 (-1,299)	-65.61%

[nventuro]

Insted of defining packable for svc and sdc, we can create the struct that contains both and just implement packable for that. If we do this, we can combine sdc and svc, since svc has a block of change (32 bits) that can be merged into sdc. Then we'd have 2N+1 total instead of 2N+2, which makes public writes cheaper and private reads a bit cheaper (less hashing).

We can do this in a separate PR.

[benesjan]

We discussed 2 days ago that we want to be able to read svc and sdc individually in public. For this reason they each need to implement packable (storage_read requires it). Here is where we read it individually.

But when writing both values get written at once as they are wrapped in SharedMutableValues.