Skip to content

chore: update to contract v6#96

Merged
michael1011 merged 1 commit intomainfrom
update-contract-v6
Feb 26, 2026
Merged

chore: update to contract v6#96
michael1011 merged 1 commit intomainfrom
update-contract-v6

Conversation

@kiocos
Copy link
Member

@kiocos kiocos commented Feb 26, 2026

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated contract deployment configurations to enhance system stability and performance.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 26, 2026

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Two contract deployment payloads in a shell script were replaced with updated bytecode values for EtherSwap and ERC20Swap deployments. The surrounding control flow and logic remain unchanged; only the hexadecimal bytecode data was modified.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Contract Deployment Payloads
images/scripts/utils.sh
Two public deployment invocations updated with new contract bytecode payloads (0x60c03461... → 0x7f8b73c3...) for EtherSwap and ERC20Swap without functional logic modifications.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 New bytecode hops in place,
Old payloads now erased,
Contracts swap with digital grace,
No logic breaks the pace,
Just hex strings in their place! 🎉

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'chore: update to contract v6' clearly describes the main change—updating contract deployment payloads to version 6—and accurately reflects the file modifications in the pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
  • 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch update-contract-v6

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@kiocos kiocos requested a review from michael1011 February 26, 2026 02:56
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
images/scripts/utils.sh (1)

377-380: Consider externalizing these bytecode blobs and validating them by hash.

Keeping very large creation bytecode inline makes accidental truncation/typos hard to catch in future edits. A small guard (e.g., load from artifact file + assert expected hash) would improve reliability.

Example direction
+ETHERSWAP_BYTECODE="$(cat /path/to/EtherSwap.bytecode)"
+ERC20SWAP_BYTECODE="$(cat /path/to/ERC20Swap.bytecode)"
+
+# optional: verify expected digests before deploying
+# echo -n "$ETHERSWAP_BYTECODE" | sha256sum | grep -q "<expected>"
+# echo -n "$ERC20SWAP_BYTECODE" | sha256sum | grep -q "<expected>"
+
- deploy_contract 0x...
+ deploy_contract "$ETHERSWAP_BYTECODE"

- deploy_contract 0x...
+ deploy_contract "$ERC20SWAP_BYTECODE"
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@images/scripts/utils.sh` around lines 377 - 380, The large inline creation
bytecode passed to deploy_contract (the two long deploy_contract invocations,
including the one labeled "ERC20Swap") should be moved into separate artifact
files and validated by hash at runtime: remove the inline hex blobs and instead
read the artifact files (e.g., erc20swap.bytecode, <other>.bytecode) in
utils.sh, compute a checksum (sha256) and compare against an
EXPECTED_HASH_<CONTRACT> constant before calling deploy_contract with the loaded
blob; add clear error handling that aborts deployment if the hash mismatches to
prevent accidental truncation/typos.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@images/scripts/utils.sh`:
- Around line 377-380: The large inline creation bytecode passed to
deploy_contract (the two long deploy_contract invocations, including the one
labeled "ERC20Swap") should be moved into separate artifact files and validated
by hash at runtime: remove the inline hex blobs and instead read the artifact
files (e.g., erc20swap.bytecode, <other>.bytecode) in utils.sh, compute a
checksum (sha256) and compare against an EXPECTED_HASH_<CONTRACT> constant
before calling deploy_contract with the loaded blob; add clear error handling
that aborts deployment if the hash mismatches to prevent accidental
truncation/typos.

ℹ️ Review info

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 97b0371 and e97cf56.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • images/scripts/utils.sh

@michael1011 michael1011 merged commit becc137 into main Feb 26, 2026
1 check passed
@michael1011 michael1011 deleted the update-contract-v6 branch February 26, 2026 20:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants