[FEEDBACK NEEDED] Support for Specifying Storage Locations

Feedback
1

We have been discussing the issue regarding support for specifying storage locations at length and shared our response in the comment below:

To further our progress on the discussion, we have put together our syntax proposal for explicit storage locations for the implementation here:
:memo: Proposal for Explicit Storage Layout Syntax

Note that we wish to make progress on this due to EIP-7702. With that being said, this is not final and we are open to feedback that could potentially help us consider alternatives or make necessary improvements to our proposal. If you would like to contribute, feel free to go through our proposal and share your inputs under this post or the original issue.

1 Like
2

Hey all!

I wanted to write a brief update on the issue regarding support for specifying storage locations that has had several discussions in the past.

Based on the feedback we have gotten so far re: our syntax proposal for explicit storage locations (see here: →Syntax proposal for explicit storage locations - HackMD), we have concluded that variant 2 will be well suited for implementation and we wish to go ahead with it. To learn about what exactly will be implemented, you can check out our update on the original issue below:
→Allow specifying storage locations · Issue #597 · ethereum/solidity · GitHub

If you have any objections or reservations around the final proposal, now would be the best time to bring it to our notice.

1 Like