* Serialization tests now pass again
* Tidy up and test more edge-cases
* Use attributes rather than custom serializer for arrays
* Add JSON Schema support
* Tests for JSON Schema generation and validation
* Add comments
* Support custom predicates
* Clippy fixes
* Make deserialization/constructor functions pub(crate)
* unify fe/be NativeOp and NativePred
* remove Origin in favour of PodId
* Combine string and hash in Key
* use middleware::AnchoredKey in frontend
* merge frontend/middleware types
* refactor custom predicates
* clean up a bit
* fix middleware custom tests
* clean up
* clean up 2
* add acronyms in typos list
* All test pass on middleware->frontend type refactor
* Convert frontend CustomPredicateRef to a named field struct
* Minor serialization improvements
* Set appropriate titles in JSON schemas
* Add names for custom predicates
* Remove PodClass from front-end Origin type
* Simplify value conversion
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Contains should take three arguments (root, key, value)
* Add a test for frontend Dictionaries
* Separate frontend and middleware operations
* Make tests pass: add arg to contains
* Cargo fmt
* Merkleproof verify circuit (#143)
* merkletree: add keypath circuit
* merkletree-circuit: implement proof of existence verification in-circuit
* parametrize max_depth at the tree circuit
* Constrain selectors in-circuit
* implement merketree nonexistence proof circuit, and add edgecase tests
* add non-existence proofs documentation in the mdbook, mv EMPTY->EMPTY_VALUE & NULL->EMPTY_HASH, dependency clean and public exposure methods
* review comments, some extra polishing and add a test that expects wrong proofs to fail
* Add circuit to check only merkleproofs-of-existence
With this, the merkletree_circuit module offers two different circuits:
- `MerkleProofCircuit`: allows to verify both proofs of existence and proofs
non-existence with the same circuit.
- `MerkleProofExistenceCircuit`: allows to verify proofs of existence only.
In this way, if only proofs of existence are needed,
`MerkleProofExistenceCircuit` should be used, which requires less amount
of constraints than `MerkleProofCircuit`.
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Towards Contains/NotContains in middleware and backend
* Fix build
* Adding error handling to deal with op compile introduce extra ops
* Incorporate Merkle proofs into MockMainPod
* Merkleproof verify circuit (#143)
* merkletree: add keypath circuit
* merkletree-circuit: implement proof of existence verification in-circuit
* parametrize max_depth at the tree circuit
* Constrain selectors in-circuit
* implement merketree nonexistence proof circuit, and add edgecase tests
* add non-existence proofs documentation in the mdbook, mv EMPTY->EMPTY_VALUE & NULL->EMPTY_HASH, dependency clean and public exposure methods
* review comments, some extra polishing and add a test that expects wrong proofs to fail
* Add circuit to check only merkleproofs-of-existence
With this, the merkletree_circuit module offers two different circuits:
- `MerkleProofCircuit`: allows to verify both proofs of existence and proofs
non-existence with the same circuit.
- `MerkleProofExistenceCircuit`: allows to verify proofs of existence only.
In this way, if only proofs of existence are needed,
`MerkleProofExistenceCircuit` should be used, which requires less amount
of constraints than `MerkleProofCircuit`.
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Towards Contains/NotContains in middleware and backend
* Frontend compound types -- allow one frontend operation to produce multiple middleware statements (in progress)
* Incorporate Merkle proofs into MockMainPod
* Incorporate Merkle proof op arg into frontend
* Compile one statement to many, in progress
* Fix remaining tests
* Minor clean-up
* Oops I did a bunch of work in the middle of a rebase, committing
* Incorporate Merkle proof op arg into frontend
* still working on frontend compound types, refactor compile() to output multiple statements
* Contains statements for frontend types: code compiles
* Tests pass
* Examples use front-end compound types
* Remove old Contains and NotContains from frontend
* Add nin to typos
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: arnaucube <git@arnaucube.com>
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* sync spec & code
* move primitives (merkletree) into the backend
* comment on the ops spec and link to issue #108
* typo
* fix github-ci mdbook-publish pages
* limit the number of StatementTmpl in CustomPredicate:
- add constructor method for CustomPredicate
- make size checks at the CustomPredicate creation, so that once instantiated we can assume that contains valid data
This resolves#79
* Update tests to use new interface
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
At the middleware we were defining some types that actually are dependant on the
backend no matter how we define them in the middleware.
For example, we were hardcoding the `Hash` and `Value` types and their related
behaviour (eg. `.to_fields()`) to be based on the length of 4 field elements,
but that's not a choice of the middleware, and in fact this is determined by the
backend itself. On the same time, those types and related methods do not belong
to the backend, since conceptually they are part of the middleware reasoning.
The intention of this PR is not to prematurely abstract the library, but to
avoid inconsistencies where a type or parameter is defined in the middleware to
have certain carachteristic and later in the backend it gets used differently.
The idea is that those types and parameters (eg. lengths) have a single source
of truth in the code; and in the case of the "base types" (hash, value, etc)
this is determined by the backend being used under the hood, not by a choice of
the middleware parameters.
The idea with this approach, is that the frontend & middleware should not need
to import the proving library used by the backend (eg. plonky2, plonky3, etc).
As mentioned earlier, the `Hash` and `Value` types are types belonging at the
middleware, and is the middleware who reasons about them, but depending on the
backend being used, the `Hash` and `Value` types will have different sizes. So
it's the backend being used who actually defines their nature under the hood.
For example with a plonky2 backend, these types will have a length of 4 field
elements, whereas with a plonky3 backend they will have a length of 8 field
eleements.
Note that his approach does not introduce new traits or abstract code, just
makes use of rust features to define 'base types' that are being used in the
middleware.
* Print pods from SignedPodBuilder
* Add additional print to test printing SignedPodBuilder
* Mock-prove and print MainPod
* Implement ToFields for custom predicates and dependencies
* Test: print serialization of a recursive batch
* Rearrange serialization of CustomPredicate so args_len is always in the same position
* Serialize predicates with first entry nonzero to avoid collision with padding
* Off by one error in ethdos test BatchSelf(2)
* cargo fmt
* not a typo
* Typos, trying again
* add comments detailing logic, migrate middleware::custom::tests to frontend::custom
* simplify custom predicate's frontend interfaces, making it less verbose to define Statement Template arguments
The main idea is that when defining the arguments at a statement
template, it can be done from 3 different inputs:
i. `(&str, literal)`: this is to set a POD and a field, ie. `(POD, literal("field")`)
ii. `(&str, &str)`: this is to define a origin-key wildcard pair, ie. `(src_origin, src_dest)`
iii. `Value`: this is to define a literal value, ie. `0`
* wip
* prototype custom predicates 1b
* feat: implement custom pred recursion
* files reorg, add github CI for rustfmt checks
* start sparsemerkletree. impl add_leaf method, initial Leaf & Intermediate types with methods
* mt: add hash computation of all the nodes in the tree, add method to print the tree to visualize it as a graphviz
* mt: add (till the leaf) method which is used by get,contains,prove methods
* mt: add verify (of inclusion) method
* mt: update 'down' method to reuse siblings, update get,contains,prove methods (the three use 'down' under the hood)
* Add nonexistence proofs and iterator
* Add iterator test
* migrate usage of old merkletree to the new merkletree impl in POD2 code
---------
Co-authored-by: Eduard S. <eduardsanou@posteo.net>
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Experiment with statement & op enums
* Clean-up & fixes
* More clean-up
* Add argument length checks
* More clean-up
* Place statement and operation logic in submodules
