test(cairo_native): compare the required starknet-native-compile version to workspace version

[avi-starkware]

No description provided.

[reviewable-StarkWare]

This change is 

[github-actions]

Artifacts upload workflows:

• Started at 2025-02-05T13:11:45Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T13:16:52Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T13:17:41Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T13:19:21Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T16:03:28Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T16:24:17Z
• Started at 2025-02-05T20:38:32Z

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 13 of 13 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @avi-starkware, @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware, and @noaov1)

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/Cargo.toml line 47 at r1 (raw file):

[[test]]
name = "cairo_native_version_test"
path = "tests/cairo_native_version_test.rs"

why not add src/constants_test.rs? separate test dir is usually for integration tests; code inside the test folder does not have access to code with cfg(test) also

Code quote:

[[test]]
name = "cairo_native_version_test"
path = "tests/cairo_native_version_test.rs"

[avi-starkware]

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/Cargo.toml line 47 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

why not add src/constants_test.rs? separate test dir is usually for integration tests; code inside the test folder does not have access to code with cfg(test) also

Done.

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 7 of 7 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @avi-starkware, @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware, and @noaov1)

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/lib.rs line 24 at r2 (raw file):

pub mod compile_test;

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]

not sure this is the correct gating... maybe cfg(test) here, and gate the test itself in the constants_test.rs file behind the feature?
the constants.rs is not in itself a cairo-native only module

Code quote:

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/lib.rs line 26 at r2 (raw file):

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]
#[path = "constants_test.rs"]
pub mod constants_test;

I don't see this file in the PR, did you forget to add it?

Code quote:

#[cfg(all(test, feature = "cairo_native"))]
#[path = "constants_test.rs"]
pub mod constants_test;

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/compile_test.rs line 77 at r2 (raw file):

    let contract_class = get_test_contract();

    // TODO(Avi, 1/1/2025): Check size/memory/time limits.

what's this? related?

Code quote:

/ TODO(Avi, 1/1/2025): Check size/memory/time limit

[avi-starkware]

Reviewable status: 15 of 17 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware, @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware, and @noaov1)

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/compile_test.rs line 77 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

what's this? related?

It is just a stale TODO
I did the resource limits test somewhere else.

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/lib.rs line 24 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

not sure this is the correct gating... maybe cfg(test) here, and gate the test itself in the constants_test.rs file behind the feature?
the constants.rs is not in itself a cairo-native only module

Done.
We have to put everything in the file under the feature flag anyway, so it doesn't matter too much...

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/lib.rs line 26 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

I don't see this file in the PR, did you forget to add it?

Oops you are right

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware and @noaov1)

---

crates/starknet_sierra_multicompile/src/lib.rs line 24 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, avi-starkware (Avi Cohen) wrote…

Done.
We have to put everything in the file under the feature flag anyway, so it doesn't matter too much...

well, yes, but in theory in the future you would have tests for the other constants, and then your #![cfg] will need to be more specific