feat(sharding): put in agreement with styleguide and port code samples to Tolk by aigerimu · Pull Request #2131 · ton-org/docs

aigerimu · 2026-04-24T20:16:34Z

closes #500

coderabbitai · 2026-04-24T20:16:42Z

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 1d799fc8-6ac2-4255-980f-c851e1cb815e

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

🔍 Trigger review

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch contract-sharding-polishing

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

mintlify · 2026-04-24T20:17:40Z

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
mintlify-ton-docs	🟢 Ready	View Preview	Apr 24, 2026, 8:19 PM

💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you.

github-actions

Thanks for the clear docs updates in contract-dev/techniques/contract-sharding.mdx: please apply the couple of inline suggestions to keep terminology casing and code formatting consistent.

delovoyhomie · 2026-04-25T07:11:54Z

+    seqno: uint64,
+    todoChildCode: cell,
+): AutoDeployAddress {
+    val childStorage: TodoChildStorage = {


I guess the child StateInit only includes seqno, so two parents using the same child code and sequence number can derive the same child address. it also contradicts the caution above, because the child has no stored parent address to verify

to fix it is to include the parent address in the child's initial storage, pass it into address derivation, and verify it in the child handler

delovoyhomie · 2026-04-25T07:21:59Z

-        self.numChildren = 0;
-    }
+fun onInternalMessage(in: InMessage) {
+    val msg = lazy TodoChildMessage.fromSlice(in.body);


I'm not sure, but I think the else branch in the match below may not be reachable as written. Since TodoChildMessage = Identify is a single-variant union, lazy TodoChildMessage.fromSlice(in.body) should throw on any body that doesn't parse as Identify - including an empty body, since the opcode parse fails first

If the intent is to ignore empty top-up messages, the empty-body check probably needs to happen before the lazy fromSlice call for instance

fun onInternalMessage(in: InMessage) { + if (in.body.isEmpty()) { + return; + } val msg = lazy TodoChildMessage.fromSlice(in.body);

it definitely worths double-checking against actual Tolk semantics

ArkadiyStena · 2026-04-28T11:28:48Z

+
+Consider NFTs: the collection acts as the parent contract, and each NFT item is a child contract. The key in this case is the item index, and only the collection can set the initial owner.
+
+For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address, and the value is the user's token balance.


Suggested change

For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address, and the value is the user's token balance.

For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address.

ArkadiyStena · 2026-04-28T11:31:24Z

+
+For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address, and the value is the user's token balance.
+
+Both patterns follow the same principle: each key maps to a separate contract. In jetton protocols, there is a unique contract per user, while in NFT collections, there is one contract per item (by index) that is shared across all users.


that is shared across all users.

This wording sounds a bit strange.

ArkadiyStena · 2026-04-28T11:37:34Z


-```tact Tact
-import "@stdlib/deploy";
+fun TodoChildStorage.save(self) {


we should add parentAddress: address here

ArkadiyStena · 2026-04-28T11:41:22Z

+struct (0x5b6f1392) DeployAnother {}
+
+// Build StateInit for a TodoChild instance with the given seqno.
+fun calcDeployedTodoChild(


maybe we should move it to parent.tolk (I am not sure)

draft

5836a07

aigerimu requested a review from a team as a code owner April 24, 2026 20:16

aigerimu marked this pull request as draft April 24, 2026 20:16

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

github-actions Bot reviewed Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread contract-dev/techniques/contract-sharding.mdx

Comment thread contract-dev/techniques/contract-sharding.mdx Outdated

mintlify Bot deployed to staging April 24, 2026 20:19 View deployment

delovoyhomie reviewed Apr 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into contract-sharding-polishing

6f905bb

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

mintlify Bot deployed to staging April 26, 2026 18:31 View deployment

comments-applied-i

0131d77

mintlify Bot deployed to staging April 28, 2026 07:29 View deployment

Merge branch 'main' into contract-sharding-polishing

b422739

mintlify Bot deployed to staging April 28, 2026 07:33 View deployment

ArkadiyStena suggested changes Apr 28, 2026

View reviewed changes


		Consider NFTs: the collection acts as the parent contract, and each NFT item is a child contract. The key in this case is the item index, and only the collection can set the initial owner.

		For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address, and the value is the user's token balance.


		For jettons, the parent contract is the minter, and the child contracts are user wallets. The key is the user's smart contract address, and the value is the user's token balance.

		Both patterns follow the same principle: each key maps to a separate contract. In jetton protocols, there is a unique contract per user, while in NFT collections, there is one contract per item (by index) that is shared across all users.

Conversation

aigerimu commented Apr 24, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 24, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Review skipped

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

mintlify Bot commented Apr 24, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

delovoyhomie Apr 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

delovoyhomie Apr 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

ArkadiyStena Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ArkadiyStena Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ArkadiyStena Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ArkadiyStena Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading

mintlify Bot commented Apr 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading