support for external circuit construction #5199
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
conorsch
force-pushed
the
protocol/lqt_branch
branch
from
19d33d2 to
2e59879
Compare
TalDerei
changed the base branch from
protocol/lqt_branch
to
protocol/lqt_branch-backup-2025-05-21
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Describe your changes
generating the public and private circuit inputs is currently tightly coupled with action construction, and that needs to be disaggregated. The motivation is twofold: (1) avoid generating the circuit inputs twice (once for delegated proving and once for local proof generation), and (2) because we'll be making HTTPs requests to Taceo's MPC network from TS, which requires the public inputs as part of the request payload. We define
ActionCircuitenum to encapsulate that.additionally, implements helper methods that (1) read the circuit inputs and perform constraint synthesis only (decoupling it from proof generation), and (2) serialize the resulting witnesses and matrices into an amenable form.
Issue ticket number and link
pairs with #5209
Checklist before requesting a review
I have added guiding text to explain how a reviewer should test these changes.
If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: