Add voyager verification to the `verify` command #2566

cwkang1998 · 2024-10-07T11:40:39Z

This is a follow up PR to complete changes that #2288 wants to introduce.

Introduced changes

Refactor the verification modules as per its predecessor PR refactor verification crate & add voyager interface #2288.
Add Voyager as one of the contract verifier target

Additional context on a possible edge case

As Voyager backend limits the http alive time to less than 30s, given a large contract which compilation might take longer, we might have to have the compilation task run asynchronously in order and have the status polled. This is currently not implemented in this PR as testing is being done to see if this is significant enough of a problem to be addressed this way.

Checklist

Will complete this checklist after another self review.

cwkang1998 · 2024-10-10T10:11:35Z

Addressing some of @integraledelebesgue comments from #2288

#[async_trait] attribute is not required #2288 (comment)

Seems that its failing to compile without the macro. Any alternatives you might have had in your mind?

Please add descriptions of all parameters to display in help

We would like to unify the wole configuration to a TOML file. Could you please redesign the url acquisition logic to use an enum provied via CastConfig rather than an environmental variable?

Both implementations of this method are identical. You can make it a default implementation

Sure

Similarly to verify, implementations of this method differ only with the url source. How about introducing a new trait method, let's say get_base_url, implementing it manually on both types and using in a default implementation of gen_explorer_url?

This method never fails. Are there any reasons for it to return a Result?
refactor verification crate & add voyager interface #2288 (comment)

I'll try that out.
I don't think so, removing it.

cwkang1998 · 2024-10-12T19:18:16Z

Successfully made some of the methods default, and remove the need of using a base struct inside each concrete verification interface struct.

Since the verification provider api is constructed slightly differently, I don't think that replacinggen_explorer_url is a valid choice anymore since the last review. However, I did still move the configuration for the custom base api url to CastConfig as suggested.

Will move on to update the current tests tomorrow.

cwkang1998 · 2024-10-14T05:25:45Z

Tests updated! Reviews would be appreciated.

piotmag769 · 2024-10-17T14:09:22Z

cc @cptartur

cptartur

Hey, thanks for contributing. I think some parts may be improved.

Also, I haven't reviewed the tests yet but will do soon.

CHANGELOG.md

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verification/base.rs

crates/sncast/src/helpers/configuration.rs

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/mod.rs

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verification/base.rs

cptartur · 2024-10-18T15:58:08Z

docs/src/appendix/sncast/verify.md

+
+The address of the contract that is to be verified.
+
+## `--class-name <CONTRACT_NAME>`


Why are we renaming this?

This is renamed as we feel its more accurate to call it class name rather than contract name. The class (or the code ) is what is being verified, and the contract is an instance of the class (contract). Thus why we decided to change the name to better reflect it.

Changing it to<CLASS_NAME> to make it clearer too.

I wonder about this. I get your point about it verifying the class. However, we're using --contract-name in sncast declare even though it just declares the contract class, so this was named mostly for consistency.

if that's the case then let's make it --contract-name for consistency. I think it all comes down to preferences, and we can wait and see if there's any feedback on this once its released.

Sorry, just went through the specs and realized that changing this might not be a good idea since prior to this we had changed the specs and walnut had followed suit with the spec change where we use --class-name instead of --contract-name. Do we want to change this again?

We can change it on our side and preserve the api payload schema, which should work. Wdyt @cptartur ?

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verification/verify.rs

docs/src/appendix/sncast/verify.md

cwkang1998 · 2024-10-23T16:44:55Z

Addressed partially, will continue in awhile to address the rest.

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verify/base.rs

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verify/mod.rs

crates/sncast/tests/e2e/verify/voyager.rs

docs/src/appendix/sncast/verify.md

cptartur · 2024-10-25T10:11:20Z

docs/src/appendix/sncast/verify.md

+
+The address of the contract that is to be verified.
+
+## `--class-name <CONTRACT_NAME>`


I wonder about this. I get your point about it verifying the class. However, we're using --contract-name in sncast declare even though it just declares the contract class, so this was named mostly for consistency.

docs/src/starknet/verify.md

cptartur

Looking good. Just some minor comments.

cptartur · 2024-11-04T16:22:29Z

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verify/mod.rs

+    #[clap(flatten)]
+    pub contract_address_or_class_hash: ContractAddressOrClassHashGroup,
+
+    /// Class name of the contract to be verified. Either this or class hash should be provided.


This is required, no?

Yes, that's a mistake on my part, will amend it now.

cptartur · 2024-11-04T16:22:54Z

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verify/mod.rs

+    #[clap(short, long)]
+    pub class_name: String,
+
+    /// Where you want your contract to be verified


Suggested change

/// Where you want your contract to be verified

/// Verification provider to be used

cptartur · 2024-11-04T16:23:16Z

crates/sncast/src/starknet_commands/verify/mod.rs

+    #[clap(long, default_value = "false")]
+    pub confirm_verification: bool,
+
+    /// Optionally specify package with the contract to be verified


Suggested change

/// Optionally specify package with the contract to be verified

/// Specify package with the contract to be verified

cptartur · 2024-11-04T16:26:34Z

docs/src/appendix/sncast/verify.md


-The address of the contract that is to be verified.
+The address of the contract that is to be verified. Either this or the class hash should be provided.


Suggested change

The address of the contract that is to be verified. Either this or the class hash should be provided.

The address of the contract that is to be verified.

cptartur · 2024-11-04T16:26:56Z

docs/src/starknet/verify.md

@@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ For detailed CLI description, see [verify command reference](../appendix/sncast/

 Walnut is a tool for step-by-step debugging of Starknet transactions. You can learn more about Walnut here [walnut.dev](https://walnut.dev). Note that Walnut requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.

+### Voyager
+
+[Voyager](https://voyager.online) is a block explorer for Starknet. It gives developers immediate insight into the state of the starknetnetwork. It also intends to become the one-stop location for all Starknet statistics. Note that Voyager requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.


Suggested change

[Voyager](https://voyager.online) is a block explorer for Starknet. It gives developers immediate insight into the state of the starknetnetwork. It also intends to become the one-stop location for all Starknet statistics. Note that Voyager requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.

[Voyager](https://voyager.online) is a block explorer for Starknet. It gives developers immediate insight into the state of the Starknet network. Note that Voyager requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.

Let's keep it simple

kkawula

Maybe it was mentioned, but you potentially by mistake reformated the entire CHANGELOG.md file. Please revert these changes.

cptartur

Looks good, let's just restore the formatting of the changelog file

CHANGELOG.md

cptartur · 2024-11-13T13:00:21Z

docs/src/starknet/verify.md

@@ -26,7 +30,7 @@ Then run:
 ```shell
 $ sncast \
    verify \
-    --contract-address 0x01e4ebe3278ab4633a9d0d3f5c4290001f29bc3179a70e570b6817dd7f8264fa \
+    --contract-address 0x8448a68b5ea1affc45e3fd4b8b480ea36a51dc34e337a16d2567d32d0c6f8b \


Why was this address changed? It doesn't seem like a class hash of any existing contract

hmm, I'm not sure why this was changed. Let me revert this.

cptartur · 2024-11-13T13:01:41Z

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0

 - You can skip `--name` flag when using `account import` - a default name will be generated.
 - Addresses outputted when calling `sncast account create`, `sncast deploy` and `sncast declare` are now padded to 64 characters length and prefixed with `0x0`
+- Voyager API support for `verify` subcommand [Read more here](https://foundry-rs.github.io/starknet-foundry/appendix/sncast/verify.html).


Generally, I try to limit the usage of links in CHANGELOG.md because they often eventually become outdated.

Suggested change

- Voyager API support for `verify` subcommand [Read more here](https://foundry-rs.github.io/starknet-foundry/appendix/sncast/verify.html).

- Voyager API support for sncast `verify` subcommand

cwkang1998 changed the title ~~Add Voyager as a contract verifier~~ Add voyager verification interface to the verify command Oct 7, 2024

cwkang1998 changed the title ~~Add voyager verification interface to the verify command~~ Add voyager verification to the verify command Oct 7, 2024

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from 3b1f764 to 4c5d105 Compare October 10, 2024 10:00

cwkang1998 marked this pull request as ready for review October 10, 2024 10:05

cwkang1998 requested review from ksew1, integraledelebesgue, cptartur and ddoktorski as code owners October 10, 2024 10:05

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from d978d39 to 70532da Compare October 14, 2024 05:25

cptartur requested changes Oct 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

cptartur self-requested a review October 18, 2024 16:06

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from 70532da to 4a9f0fd Compare October 23, 2024 16:42

cwkang1998 requested review from kkawula and franciszekjob as code owners October 23, 2024 16:42

cptartur requested changes Oct 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch 2 times, most recently from 9fb1de9 to 4d46251 Compare October 31, 2024 23:02

cwkang1998 requested a review from cptartur October 31, 2024 23:02

cptartur reviewed Nov 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from e344b3a to 9a54415 Compare November 5, 2024 15:28

cptartur self-requested a review November 6, 2024 12:12

kkawula reviewed Nov 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

cptartur approved these changes Nov 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

CHANGELOG.md Show resolved Hide resolved

cwkang1998 requested a review from kkawula November 7, 2024 16:22

base implementation of voyager verification

1105822

cwkang1998 added 14 commits November 13, 2024 10:08

add voyager specific urls

a83254e

Add docs to changelogs

f78258a

Add description to cli args

36474bf

Make verify & some shared methods default

ea3ca4d

Move custom base api url for verify to CastConfig

65d80e0

Ammend tests for verification urls

0eb545b

Extract redundant trait functions

d4a9cdd

Move config to verify level & utilize ArgGroups

321dd12

rename explorer url fn & remove default verify provider

c313860

Add voyager as verify provider to docs

c607ef2

Add test for both class hash & contract addr. provided

1dc687f

Refactor verifier verify fn

4b2528e

Correct wording for docs

a8c1afb

revert changelog accidental formatting

0b8f0f7

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from 0b1523b to 9ced501 Compare November 13, 2024 03:27

Change class-name flag back to contract-name

caf4a1e

cwkang1998 force-pushed the feat/add-voyager-verification branch from 9ced501 to caf4a1e Compare November 13, 2024 03:33

cptartur reviewed Nov 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

Update docs for changelog & verify

5b5ea0d

cptartur approved these changes Nov 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add voyager verification to the `verify` command #2566

Add voyager verification to the `verify` command #2566

cwkang1998 commented Oct 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 12, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 14, 2024

piotmag769 commented Oct 17, 2024

cptartur left a comment •

edited

Loading

cptartur Oct 18, 2024

cwkang1998 Oct 24, 2024

cptartur Oct 25, 2024

cwkang1998 Oct 31, 2024

cwkang1998 Oct 31, 2024

cwkang1998 commented Oct 23, 2024

cptartur Oct 25, 2024

cptartur left a comment

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

cwkang1998 Nov 5, 2024

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

cptartur Nov 4, 2024

kkawula left a comment

cptartur left a comment

cptartur Nov 13, 2024

cwkang1998 Nov 14, 2024

cptartur Nov 13, 2024


		The address of the contract that is to be verified.

		## `--class-name <CONTRACT_NAME>`

	/// Where you want your contract to be verified
	/// Verification provider to be used

	/// Optionally specify package with the contract to be verified
	/// Specify package with the contract to be verified

	[Voyager](https://voyager.online) is a block explorer for Starknet. It gives developers immediate insight into the state of the starknetnetwork. It also intends to become the one-stop location for all Starknet statistics. Note that Voyager requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.
	[Voyager](https://voyager.online) is a block explorer for Starknet. It gives developers immediate insight into the state of the Starknet network. Note that Voyager requires you to specify the Starknet version in your `Scarb.toml` config file.

	- Voyager API support for `verify` subcommand [Read more here](https://foundry-rs.github.io/starknet-foundry/appendix/sncast/verify.html).
	- Voyager API support for sncast `verify` subcommand

Add voyager verification to the verify command #2566

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add voyager verification to the verify command #2566

Conversation

cwkang1998 commented Oct 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Introduced changes

Additional context on a possible edge case

Checklist

cwkang1998 commented Oct 10, 2024 • edited Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 12, 2024 • edited Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 14, 2024

piotmag769 commented Oct 17, 2024

cptartur left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cwkang1998 commented Oct 23, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cptartur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kkawula left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cptartur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Add voyager verification to the `verify` command #2566

Add voyager verification to the `verify` command #2566

cwkang1998 commented Oct 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cwkang1998 commented Oct 12, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cptartur left a comment •

edited

Loading