[WIP] Consistent naming needed about fuel-v1-contracts HOT 5 CLOSED

I think I would like to leverage more dot notation here.

mstruct Something( someVar: uint256 )

Something.someVar.get(memPtr)

We can make a very small change to Yul+ to add this clarity here.

As for other selector methods, yes, I'm fine with changing it to getXThing vs selectXThing

The mstruct change along with the selector change should make getters more consistent across the board.

Can you expand on what you mean by stateElement here?

Fine with adding distinct Ptr suffix until we get mem pointer types and types in Yul+.

from fuel-v1-contracts.

Can you expand on what you mean by stateElement here?

State element as in, a UTXO, a deposit, or a root [UTXO]. These aren't part of an inclusion proof, and so should be named distinctly.

from fuel-v1-contracts.

• token -> tokenId where tokenId is used in all structs / events (e.e. Deposit) etc.

from fuel-v1-contracts.

• amount -> value or a consistent use of either term value or amount.

Suggestion: amount for proofs (i.e. UTXO / Deposit), value for everything else.

from fuel-v1-contracts.

Closing in favor of rewriting contracts for future versions in Solidity.

from fuel-v1-contracts.