Upgrade coverage dependency

[arr00]

Fixes #5231

Upgrade to solidity-coverage 0.8.13 which contains a fix for processing files compiled with IR route enabled. Ignore the known Statement has no effect warning.

PR Checklist

• Tests
• Documentation
• Changeset entry (run npx changeset add)

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: eec9105

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[socket-security]

New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Package	New capabilities	Transitives	Size	Publisher
npm/[email protected]	environment, filesystem Transitive: eval, network, unsafe	+187	30.6 MB	cgewecke

🚮 Removed packages: npm/[email protected]

View full report↗︎

[arr00]

There are other issues with running coverage now. Some tests fail due to time limits and gas issues.

[cgewecke]

Hi @arr00, I help maintain solidity-coverage.

I think it was a mistake for solidity-coverage to deprecate the configureYulOptimizer and solcOptimizerDetails options. These settings are equivalent to forge's ir-minimum and they let the coverage plugin work pretty efficiently.

By contrast, the strategy solidity-coverage uses for projects that only compile with full IR is computationally expensive - it has to search for coverage traces across a much larger range of opcodes. It isn't scaling well for a test suite as large as this one.

I think if coverage is working OK with the current config it's fine to leave it like that. You could upgrade to the latest version of the plugin and continue to use these options but there's no obvious benefit to that.

Apologies for any confusion the coverage docs have caused, I wasn't aware the plugin's viaIR performance was scaling this badly until I looked into this PR.

[arr00]

Appreciate the comment @cgewecke. We'll keep coverage as is for now, but feel free to ping me here if there are fixes regarding this in the future.