Faye Amacker
Faye Amacker
@turbolent this PR looks good to me. Do you want to updated this PR to use `Payload.Address()` in PR #5948?
@aalireza Thanks for opening this issue. I am looking into it.
@folays Thanks for opening this issue and providing detailed information! I'll take a closer look (most likely next weekend).
### Atree Inlining & Deduplication (Testnet Results) #### Before/After Comparison Using Aug 14, 2024 Devnet State Mtrie Nodes and Atree Payloads Atree Payload Sizes (bytes) #### Total Counts | |...
Closed as completed. Thanks Bastian for amazing work! :raised_hands:
Hi @bluesign Thanks! This looks interesting! I'll take a look after wrapping up `diff-states` comparisons. Currently focused on correctness before resuming optimizations.
> @fxamacker I assume both values and type information will be re-ordered? @turbolent Yes. Both would be re-ordered, and maybe both should be unexported.
> @fxamacker Can you please verify that https://github.com/onflow/cadence/pull/3290 is sufficient? Or do we also need to unexport field types? @turbolent I can probably take a look tomorrow at CCF after...
> @fxamacker Can you please verify that https://github.com/onflow/cadence/pull/3290 is sufficient? Or do we also need to unexport field types? @turbolent I think we should also unexport field types for consistency...
@turbolent BTW, in PR #3290 it seems `FieldsMappedByName()` includes attachment as a field if present, while `SearchFieldByName()` only looks up field type definition. Is it OK for these two functions...