✨ feat(tests): EIP-7928 Single-Opcode Success and OOG test cases

[raxhvl]

🗒️ Description

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

N/A.

✅ Checklist

• All: Ran fast tox checks to avoid unnecessary CI fails, see also Code Standards and Enabling Pre-commit Checks:

  uvx --with=tox-uv tox -e lint,typecheck,spellcheck,markdownlint

• All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
• All: Considered adding an entry to CHANGELOG.md.
• All: Considered updating the online docs in the ./docs/ directory.
• All: Set appropriate labels for the changes (only maintainers can apply labels).
• Tests: Ran mkdocs serve locally and verified the auto-generated docs for new tests in the Test Case Reference are correctly formatted.

[fselmo]

@raxhvl, as you know, we're pushing toward The Weld™ at the moment (eels + eest merging) and so we are trying to get PRs close to mergeable. I'm happy to go a different direction here but this needed a rebase, lint fixing, and all the tests needed the expectations updated so I made some decisions and pushed them that we can then work on top of. Let's discuss the approach here if this is not what we want but my changes here, other than rebasing and lint fix, were:

• Change all test cases to readable in the sense that:
  1. We calculate the exact gas and check the positive expectation
  2. We then subtract a single gas from this so a reader knows for sure that it is failing at that Opcode, and we check the appropriate expectation (note: not None since the target is still recorded, but empty expectation for the address instead).
• Rename test file to *_opcodes.py. This feels quite broad but the original intention is to test all sorts of single opcode edge cases. This could use more thought.
• Remove the exception markers as these are not exception tests, just runs out of gas.
• Removed the two basic test cases from the valid tests file as reads and writes are now tested positively with the positive SLOAD and SSTORE tests.

I think this makes the cases more obvious to a reader (subtracting exactly 1 gas for OOG) and allows us to test both positive and negative cases in the same test. That said, I am quite open to another organization for these so please let me know your thoughts now that this is stable and let's change these here accordingly!

[raxhvl]

Thanks @fselmo, I agree with all your decisions.

I think between this and the positive we cover a lot of ground. @marioevz does it cover everything you had in mind?

There are some more OOG test cases in this PR: #2116, lets add them later and keep this PR minimal.

I made a small change - added ids to test parameters to make results more readable. 6d0de55

[fselmo]

lgtm 👍🏼 Thanks!