Open OliverNChalk opened 1 month ago
A bit hard to review as all code is on the same PR
yeah can we split this up please?
Don't currently have the bandwidth to do this but if you wanna cherry pick the commits you want that's cool with me. Else I'll circle back to this when I'm looking to finalize my project that depends on it. For now im just building a fork
ok i'll ask some questions here then. Firstly why does the precompiles commit need to add logic to check program IDs in process_transaction
?
ok i'll ask some questions here then. Firstly why does the precompiles commit need to add logic to check program IDs in
process_transaction
?
When I was running TXs with precompiles I was getting a missing account error. To fix this I created dummy accounts, perhaps it would be more correct to avoid trying to load the account if it is a precompile?
I saw construct_instructions_account
was doing a similar (though not dummy) operation.
Hey coming back to this:
When I was running TXs with precompiles I was getting a missing account error.
What are these missing accounts supposed to be?
Support LoaderV2 and LoaderV4.
I think for users who want more control over what loader gets used we should just direct them to build the loader instructions and send the required transactions
Return post account state when using simulate so test assertions can be run.
This is useful, I will include it in a separate PR
Passing AccountsDb to SanitizeTransaction::try_crate to get the account_keys iterable.
Which commit is this?
Passing AccountsDb to SanitizeTransaction::try_crate to get the account_keys iterable.
Which commit is this?
https://github.com/LiteSVM/litesvm/pull/78/commits/f7dc4ad4c680c012599504fee7865c66402db437
Usage:
let tx = SanitizedTransaction::try_create(
tx,
MessageHash::Compute,
Some(false),
&svm.accounts,
)
.unwrap();
Hi, feel free to let me know if you want certain commits dropped/reworked. I made these changes to my fork to enable:
AccountsDb
toSanitizeTransaction::try_crate
to get the account_keys iterable.