Make our Uint types homogenous and create a macro for them (keep it DRY!)

[uint]

Homogenous meaning it'd be cool if they all used the same thing internally (e.g. Parity's uint types).

A macro (or maybe some sort of generic implementation using const generics?) would help us write all the methods, operator implementations, etc. once only rather than copy-pasting code.

[webmaster128]

Note: the macro is only for code generation inside of cosmwasm_std. The usage of the types should not need to use a macro.

[webmaster128]

I was wondering if we should have two macros:

1. One based on primitives u64 and u128
2. One based on parity U***

This has two advantages

• no need for the overhead of U*** in case a primitive exists
• we can utilize all standard library funtions of the primitives
• (less change from the status quo)

[uint]

I was wondering if we should have two macros:
...

We could try doing something like that and seeing how well it works, sure.

[archseer]

For primitives you could simply provide serializers and have users use them in their schemas, that's how we've dealt with i128:

pub mod int128 {
    use serde::{self, Deserialize, Deserializer, Serializer};

    pub fn serialize<S>(bigint: &i128, serializer: S) -> Result<S::Ok, S::Error>
    where
        S: Serializer,
    {
        serializer.serialize_str(&bigint.to_string())
    }

    pub fn deserialize<'de, D>(deserializer: D) -> Result<i128, D::Error>
    where
        D: Deserializer<'de>,
    {
        let str = String::deserialize(deserializer)?;
        str::parse::<i128>(&str).map_err(serde::de::Error::custom)
    }
}

It becomes slightly more code in serializable structs:

    #[serde(with = "int128")]
    #[schemars(with = "i128")]
    pub value: i128,

but we get to use the native types without wrapper methods.

[webmaster128]

Nice trick, @archseer. I wasn't aware it's that easy to build custom serializers. We'll still keep our types, but good to know.

[ethanfrey]

We added u128 and i128 support to serde-json-wasm: CosmWasm/serde-json-wasm#32

Can we consider this closed now?

[webmaster128]

I'm not convinced that we need macros to avoid the duplication. Especially since Uint{64,128} and Uint{256,512} are implemented differently. It would help against forgetting APIs at the cost of indirection and harder code. I'm not against it but certainly not a priority. If this gets useful later, let's discuss more specific what exactly should be DRYed and how.