feat: implement thin transaction converter

[MohammadNassar1]

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 9 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 45.41%. Comparing base (78975d5) to head (8c0da42).

Files	Patch %	Lines
crates/gateway/src/utils.rs	0.00%	9 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #145      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   46.05%   45.41%   -0.65%     
==========================================
  Files          19       19              
  Lines         634      643       +9     
  Branches      634      643       +9     
==========================================
  Hits          292      292              
- Misses        328      337       +9     
  Partials       14       14              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @elintul, @MohammadNassar1, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 38 at r1 (raw file):

        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.nonce,
    }
}

Consider defining this in starknet API similar to #234

(Note - I did not include sender_address here as it does not work for deploy account).

Code quote:

pub fn get_tip(tx: &ExternalTransaction) -> Tip {
    match tx {
        ExternalTransaction::Declare(ExternalDeclareTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.tip,
        ExternalTransaction::DeployAccount(ExternalDeployAccountTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.tip,
        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.tip,
    }
}

pub fn get_nonce(tx: &ExternalTransaction) -> Nonce {
    match tx {
        ExternalTransaction::Declare(ExternalDeclareTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.nonce,
        ExternalTransaction::DeployAccount(ExternalDeployAccountTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.nonce,
        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.nonce,
    }
}

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 49 at r1 (raw file):

        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.sender_address,
    }
}

Suggestion:

pub fn get_sender_address(tx: &ExternalTransaction) -> ContractAddress {
    match tx {
        ExternalTransaction::Declare(ExternalDeclareTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.sender_address,
        // TODO(Mohammad): Add support for deploy account.
        ExternalTransaction::DeployAccount(ExternalDeployAccountTransaction::V3(_)) => {
            ContractAddress::default()
        }
        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.sender_address,
    }
}

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArniStarkware, @elintul, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 49 at r1 (raw file):

        ExternalTransaction::Invoke(ExternalInvokeTransaction::V3(tx)) => tx.sender_address,
    }
}

Why sender_address? In Mempool we tend to use contract_address.

[ArniStarkware]

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 38 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

Consider defining this in starknet API similar to #234

(Note - I did not include sender_address here as it does not work for deploy account).

As discussed in DMs. This is nonblocking.

I do suggest we conform to the same design.

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @elintul, @MohammadNassar1, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 49 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, MohammadNassar1 (mohammad-starkware) wrote…

Why sender_address? In Mempool we tend to use contract_address.

1. I did not know that about Mempool, so I am willing to concede it.
2. This field is called sender_address in external transactions. This is a property of external transactions.

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArniStarkware, @elintul, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 38 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

As discussed in DMs. This is nonblocking.

I do suggest we conform to the same design.

Opened a PR, please take a look:
starkware-libs/starknet-api#255

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArniStarkware, @elintul, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 38 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, MohammadNassar1 (mohammad-starkware) wrote…

Opened a PR, please take a look:
starkware-libs/starknet-api#255

Integrating the new SN_API commit is a bit more complicated as it includes some breaking changes made by other teams.
Currently, I added a TODO to use it from the SN_API once the blockier supports the new SN_API version.

---

crates/gateway/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 49 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

1. I did not know that about Mempool, so I am willing to concede it.
2. This field is called sender_address in external transactions. This is a property of external transactions.

Changed to sender_address.

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @elintul and @Yael-Starkware)