xcvm: simplify instructions handling in interpreter contract

[mina86]

XCVMProgram::instructions is a VecDeque. The simplest way to split it into first element and tail containing the rest of the instruction is to use pop_front method. In fact, this is a constant-time operation.

However, handle_execute_step does a strange dance where it converts the instructions into an iterator and then collects the iterator into a new VecDeque. That’s an O(n) operation with an additional allocation.

Simplify the code to use the pop_front instead.

• PR title is my best effort to provide summary of changes and has clear text to be part of release notes
• I marked PR by misc label if it should not be in release notes
• I have linked Zenhub/Github or any other reference item if one exists
• I was clear on what type of deployment required to release my changes (node, runtime, contract, indexer, on chain operation, frontend, infrastructure) if any in PR title or description
• I waited and did best effort for pr-workflow-check / draft-release-check to finish with success(green check mark) with my changes
• I have added at least one reviewer in reviewers list
• I tagged(@) or used other form of notification of one person who I think can handle best review of this PR
• I have proved that PR has no general regressions of relevant features and processes required to release into production

[mina86]

@dzmitry-lahoda, low priority but if you have a moment feel free to take a look.

[blasrodri]

Are we running XCVM on CI?

[dzmitry-lahoda]

no, we do not run

[dzmitry-lahoda]

@mina86 did you run xcvm contracts tests? i doubt these part of CI, so need to run manually

I have proved that PR has no general regressions of relevant features and processes required to release into production

just to ensure all as was before (i guess tests could already fail before, hope not :) )

[mina86]

@mina86 did you run xcvm contracts tests? i doubt these part of CI, so need to run manually

I have proved that PR has no general regressions of relevant features and processes required to release into production

just to ensure all as was before (i guess tests could already fail before, hope not :) )

Yeah, I’m kinda confused interpreting the CI results. Like bunch of them fail but all that GitHub gives me is ‘This job failed’. That’s not a useful information which I can use to figure out the problem.

[dzmitry-lahoda]

@mina86 please press

it is GH queue

[dzmitry-lahoda]

@mina86 Your care about this draft-release-check job and its dependencies (see needs). In your case it seem green.