Skip to content

Conversation

BobTheBuidler
Copy link

@BobTheBuidler BobTheBuidler commented Sep 8, 2025

What I did

This PR implements faster-eth-utils, my faster fork of eth-utils.

Benchmarks are available here.

Checklist

  • Passes all linting checks (pre-commit and CI jobs)
  • New test cases have been added and are passing
  • Documentation has been updated
  • PR title follows Conventional Commit standard (will be automatically included in the changelog)

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
from ape import chain
from ape.logging import logger
from ape.utils import ManagerAccessMixin
from eth_utils import to_checksum_address
from cchecksum import to_checksum_address
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wouldn't it make sense to re-export this via your package? (to maintain compatibility)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's a good idea but it isn't currently implemented and I have a bit of a pile in front of me to work thru first. Up to you how to handle it here for the time being. The faster implementation is still faster, just less magnitude of difference.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The most recent faster-eth-utils now uses the implementation from cchecksum

So it depends on how tight you'd like the pin to be

@fubuloubu
Copy link
Member

Overall, what platforms/architectures does this new package support?

@BobTheBuidler
Copy link
Author

It supports all CPython distros >= 3.8

@BobTheBuidler
Copy link
Author

Just # type: ignore'd the type error.

@fubuloubu
Copy link
Member

Just # type: ignore'd the type error.

oof, needs noqa: E501 at the end of it

@BobTheBuidler
Copy link
Author

done

@BobTheBuidler
Copy link
Author

BobTheBuidler commented Sep 16, 2025

bro what? evidently we can't have a type: ignore and a noqa: on the same line

should we just break up that line?

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