fix: chunkIntoN to chunk correctly #6035
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
* FIX: fixed chunkIntoN to chunk correctly chunkIntoN was chunking into N chunks, however it is used to chunk eth_getCode and eth_getProof responses into chunks of 2, so the desired action should be to chunk into chunks of length N https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/blob/unstable/packages/prover/src/utils/evm.ts#L105 Because the current tests work on chunking array of length 4 into 2 the previous behavior was working and passing tests. When there are 6 requests the current behavior no longer works * Fix strings in test
nflaig
reviewed
Oct 12, 2023
| output: [[1, 2, 3], [4]], | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| title: "when data have different order", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this test case make sense? it makes it seem like the type of elements are relevant, rather would add 1-2 tests cases that show that it works with any type of elements, e.g. objects or nested arrays
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes just want to make sure doing chunk does not change the order.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All the other existing test cases already assert that.
My point is that why would the values of elements impact that?
data have different order
Makes it sounds like this chunkIntoN inspects the value of elements, which it does not. IMO better way to prove this is to use different types of elements.
Performance Report✔️ no performance regression detected Full benchmark results
|
nflaig
reviewed
Oct 12, 2023
| output: [[1, 2, 3], [4]], | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| title: "when data have different order", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All the other existing test cases already assert that.
My point is that why would the values of elements impact that?
data have different order
Makes it sounds like this chunkIntoN inspects the value of elements, which it does not. IMO better way to prove this is to use different types of elements.
Co-authored-by: Nico Flaig <[email protected]>
|
@nflaig When reading the test we should read in full context from the description. So I believe current pattern feels more natural to read. |
nflaig
approved these changes
Oct 12, 2023
wemeetagain
approved these changes
Oct 12, 2023
|
🎉 This PR is included in v1.12.0 🎉 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
Fix the chunk size helper.
Description
Steps to test or reproduce
Run all tests