bug(`forge build`): contract using `setUp` as function is tagged as `is_dev_contract` causing it to be filtered out in `--sizes` table

[miohtama]

Component

Forge

Have you ensured that all of these are up to date?

• Foundry
• Foundryup

What version of Foundry are you on?

forge Version: 1.2.3-stable Commit SHA: a813a2c Build Timestamp: 2025-06-08T15:42:50.507050000Z (1749397370) Build Profile: maxperf

What version of Foundryup are you on?

foundryup --version foundryup: 1.3.0

What command(s) is the bug in?

forge build --force --sizes

Operating System

macOS (Apple Silicon)

Describe the bug

For some reason, forge build --sizes does not show the sizes of all contracts.

• I have double checked that the contract is not abstract
• I have double checked that the contract compiles

Here is a command I run

forge build --force --sizes -vvvvv src/TradingStrategyModuleV0.sol

Here is the output and you can see it compiles multiple contract mores than in --sizes output:

[⠊] Compiling...
[⠒] Files to compile:
- ../guard/src/GuardV0Base.sol
- /Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/guard/src/IGuard.sol
- /Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/guard/src/lib/BytesLib.sol
- /Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/guard/src/lib/IERC20.sol
- /Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/guard/src/lib/IERC4626.sol
- /Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/guard/src/lib/Path.sol
- lib/openzeppelin-contracts-upgradeable/contracts/access/OwnableUpgradeable.sol
- lib/openzeppelin-contracts-upgradeable/contracts/proxy/utils/Initializable.sol
- lib/openzeppelin-contracts-upgradeable/contracts/utils/ContextUpgradeable.sol
- lib/safe-contracts/contracts/common/Enum.sol
- lib/zodiac/contracts/core/Module.sol
- lib/zodiac/contracts/factory/FactoryFriendly.sol
- lib/zodiac/contracts/interfaces/IAvatar.sol
- src/TradingStrategyModuleV0.sol
[⠆] Compiling 14 files with Solc 0.8.26
[⠰] Solc 0.8.26 finished in 116.28ms
Compiler run successful!

╭----------+------------------+-------------------+--------------------+---------------------╮
| Contract | Runtime Size (B) | Initcode Size (B) | Runtime Margin (B) | Initcode Margin (B) |
+============================================================================================+
| BytesLib | 85               | 160               | 24,491             | 48,992              |
|----------+------------------+-------------------+--------------------+---------------------|
| Enum     | 62               | 88                | 24,514             | 49,064              |
|----------+------------------+-------------------+--------------------+---------------------|
| Path     | 85               | 160               | 24,491             | 48,992              |
╰----------+------------------+-------------------+--------------------+---------------------╯

Specifically we can check TradingStrategyModuleV0 is not an abstract contract and should appear in the --sizes output:

cat out/TradingStrategyModuleV0.sol/TradingStrategyModuleV0.json| jq ".bytecode"

{
  "object": "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...

If this is not a known issue, as I could not find this in issue search, I can set up a repo to reproduce.

[zerosnacks]

Hi @miohtama, thanks for reporting!

I do not believe this is a known issue, a minimal reproduction would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[miohtama]

I added some manual tracing and looks like some contracts are incorrectly identified as "dev contracts"

Debug: contract 'TradingStrategyModuleV0' at path '/Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/safe-integration/src/TradingStrategyModuleV0.sol' is_dev_contract = true

[zerosnacks]

Would you mind sharing the function signatures of TradingStrategyModuleV0? There is likely a function name that marks it as a test or script.

[miohtama]

Ok tracked it down: I wrote a function function called setUp() which is used in the proxy deployments to initialise the contract after the deployment. This conflicts with foundry testing patterns.

Debug: contract 'TradingStrategyModuleV0' at path '/Users/moo/code/trade-executor/deps/web3-ethereum-defi/contracts/safe-integration/src/TradingStrategyModuleV0.sol' is_dev_contract = true (reason: test function: setUp)

The actual test function patterns are:

    /// Returns the name of the function kind.
    pub const fn name(&self) -> &'static str {
        match self {
            Self::Setup => "setUp",
            Self::UnitTest { should_fail: false } => "test",
            Self::UnitTest { should_fail: true } => "testFail",
            Self::FuzzTest { should_fail: false } => "fuzz",
            Self::FuzzTest { should_fail: true } => "fuzz fail",
            Self::InvariantTest => "invariant",
            Self::TableTest => "table",
            Self::AfterInvariant => "afterInvariant",
            Self::Fixture => "fixture",
            Self::Unknown => "unknown",
        }
    }

In common/src/traits.rs

As this is a corner case, I propose that I can addressed by having forge to output the line:

N contracts excluded from the size output as they were detected as test or development contracts.

At least this way the user gets a hint what's going on and there is no silent disappearance of data.

Happy to implement a patch.