OpenZeppelin / OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts
Add `Uint128Heap`, `Uint64Heap` & `Uint32Heap`
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
idea
- Dominant language
- Solidity
- Stars
- 27.2k
- Forks
- 12.4k
- Avg merge
- 2d 19h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 33
Description
Add Uint128Heap, Uint64Heap and Uint32Heap next to existing Uint256Heap to benefit from packing.
[...]
struct Uint128Heap {
uint128[] tree;
}
[...]
struct Uint64Heap {
uint64[] tree;
}
[...]
struct Uint32Heap {
uint32[] tree;
}
Most of the logic for all variants can be shared into a Heap.sol.eta.
Numbers from Claude:
Warm (build+drain, one tx), total gas vs `Uint256Heap`: **128 −31%, 64 −51%, 32 −61%**.
Cold per-op (`vm.cool` before each), insert / pop:
| width | insert | pop |
|------:|-------:|----:|
| 256 | 43,604 | 35,940 |
| 128 | 22,003 | 32,366 |
| 64 | 19,714 | 27,246 |
| 32 | 16,969 | 22,666 |
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the existing Uint256Heap implementation and the proposed Heap.sol.eta abstraction. Add Uint128Heap, Uint64Heap, and Uint32Heap alongside it, sharing the common heap logic, then verify that each variant supports the same operations and delivers the intended packed-storage behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- solidity
- Domain
- blockchain
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Active
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 68/100