jalextowle commented 3 months ago

Description

This PR adds a new mode to the debugging tools for simulating a transaction that has already been mined. This addresses a limitation of the tool by allowing users to simulate a transaction at a specified block height and transaction height within the block. This will make the tool more useful on mainnet and testnet environments where we can't assume that each transaction will be executed in separate blocks.

In addition to adding the new debugging mode, this PR also spruces up the tool and makes it more usable by relying more heavily on debugging-specific environment variables.

Review Checklists

Please check each item before approving the pull request. While going through the checklist, it is recommended to leave comments on items that are referenced in the checklist to make sure that they are reviewed. If there are multiple reviewers, copy the checklists into sections titled ## [Reviewer Name]. If the PR doesn't touch Solidity, the corresponding checklist can be removed.

[[Reviewer Name]]

[ ] Tokens
- [ ] Do all approve calls use forceApprove?
- [ ] Do all transfer calls use safeTransfer?
- [ ] Do all transferFrom calls use msg.sender as the from address?
  - [ ] If not, is the function access restricted to prevent unauthorized token spend?
[ ] Low-level calls (call, delegatecall, staticcall, transfer, send)
- [ ] Is the returned success boolean checked to handle failed calls?
- [ ] If using delegatecall, are there strict access controls on the addresses that can be called? It shouldn't be possible to delegatecall arbitrary addresses, so the list of possible targets should either be immutable or tightly controlled by an admin.
[ ] Reentrancy
- [ ] Are functions that make external calls or transfer ether marked as nonReentrant?
  - [ ] If not, is there documentation that explains why reentrancy is not a concern or how it's mitigated?
[ ] Gas Optimizations
- [ ] Is the logic as simple as possible?
- [ ] Are the storage values that are used repeatedly cached in stack or memory variables?
- [ ] If loops are used, are there guards in place to avoid out-of-gas issues?
[ ] Visibility
- [ ] Are all payable functions restricted to avoid stuck ether?
[ ] Math
- [ ] Is all of the arithmetic checked or guarded by if-statements that will catch underflows?
- [ ] If Safe functions are altered, are potential underflows and overflows caught so that a failure flag can be thrown?
- [ ] Are all of the rounding directions clearly documented?
[ ] Testing
- [ ] Are there new or updated unit or integration tests?
- [ ] Do the tests cover the happy paths?
- [ ] Do the tests cover the unhappy paths?
- [ ] Are there an adequate number of fuzz tests to ensure that we are covering the full input space?

coveralls commented 3 months ago

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9505286878

Details

0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
Overall coverage remained the same at 92.888%

Totals
Change from base Build 9504821912:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	1907
Relevant Lines:	2053

💛 - Coveralls

coveralls commented 3 months ago

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9505329870

Details

0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
Overall coverage decreased (-0.05%) to 92.84%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
contracts/src/libraries/LPMath.sol	1	83.14%
<!--	Total:	1		-->

Totals
Change from base Build 9504821912:	-0.05%
Covered Lines:	1906
Relevant Lines:	2053

💛 - Coveralls

github-actions[bot] commented 3 months ago

Hyperdrive Gas Benchmark

Benchmark suite	Current: 7c5cdf6941f9d62454a65658c7143aa4ebd6a095	Previous: 4f023244984d203d29c42c7caac79150a65352fc	Deviation	Status
`addLiquidity: min`	`33937` gas	`33827` gas	`0.3252%`	🚨
`addLiquidity: avg`	`156052` gas	`155252` gas	`0.5153%`	🚨
`addLiquidity: max`	`429437` gas	`429092` gas	`0.0804%`	🚨
`checkpoint: min`	`40316` gas	`40292` gas	`0.0596%`	🚨
`checkpoint: avg`	`144560` gas	`142311` gas	`1.5803%`	🚨
`checkpoint: max`	`255830` gas	`253424` gas	`0.9494%`	🚨
`closeLong: min`	`31361` gas	`31361` gas	`0%`	🟰
`closeLong: avg`	`136339` gas	`136004` gas	`0.2463%`	🚨
`closeLong: max`	`2621435` gas	`2621386` gas	`0.0019%`	🚨
`closeShort: min`	`31327` gas	`31349` gas	`-0.0702%`	✅
`closeShort: avg`	`132301` gas	`132022` gas	`0.2113%`	🚨
`closeShort: max`	`272530` gas	`263302` gas	`3.5047%`	🚨
`initialize: min`	`31349` gas	`31371` gas	`-0.0701%`	✅
`initialize: avg`	`333305` gas	`330980` gas	`0.7025%`	🚨
`initialize: max`	`399922` gas	`397010` gas	`0.7335%`	🚨
`openLong: min`	`33370` gas	`33370` gas	`0%`	🟰
`openLong: avg`	`174369` gas	`174132` gas	`0.1361%`	🚨
`openLong: max`	`335241` gas	`306958` gas	`9.2140%`	🚨
`openShort: min`	`33936` gas	`33936` gas	`0%`	🟰
`openShort: avg`	`168770` gas	`168517` gas	`0.1501%`	🚨
`openShort: max`	`415854` gas	`415737` gas	`0.0281%`	🚨
`redeemWithdrawalShares: min`	`31251` gas	`31251` gas	`0%`	🟰
`redeemWithdrawalShares: avg`	`75185` gas	`75086` gas	`0.1318%`	🚨
`redeemWithdrawalShares: max`	`305633` gas	`210204` gas	`45.3983%`	🚨
`removeLiquidity: min`	`31301` gas	`31301` gas	`0%`	🟰
`removeLiquidity: avg`	`215498` gas	`214869` gas	`0.2927%`	🚨
`removeLiquidity: max`	`404194` gas	`403971` gas	`0.0552%`	🚨