EVM: Implement EIP-7907 (Glamsterdam PFI)#4052
EVM: Implement EIP-7907 (Glamsterdam PFI)#4052jgresham wants to merge 7 commits intoethereumjs:masterfrom
Conversation
|
Hi there! Yes, when Great work so far, I would however wait until the EIP "stabilizes" a bit, because some things are underspecified or might change (see discussion: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-7907-meter-contract-code-size-and-increase-limit/23156) |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
To add on comments from @jochem-brouwer: at the end fully your decision of course if you want to continue based on the current EIP state. Just to manage expectations a bit, we do not merge these kind of EIP integrations until a certain level of stability/certainty about inclusion state is reached. So might be that this this PR will need to remain open/unmerged for a couple of weeks or (eventually) months. |
Understood. Thanks for the info. I was thinking to leave it open until fully implemented and use the PR diff as a comparison point with other clients. I'm hoping to get more knowledgeable and involved on the remaining spec for the EIP too. |
|
Is there a way to see if code is "loaded" in EthereumJS? There is a distinction being discussed in the EIP between gas cost for warm account and loaded code and warm account and not loaded code
|
|
Yes, use |
|
Note: this EIP has been removed from the Fusaka HF and is now (time of comment) being proposed for inclusion in the Glamsterdam HF: |
|
(have updated title and labels to reflect the new state) |
execution specs reference implementation https://github.com/ethereum/execution-specs/pull/1231/files
#4051