use alloy transaction types

[mattsse]

the core tx types are quivalent to alloy's:

reth/crates/primitives/src/transaction/eip1559.rs

Line 13 in 67f6176

pub struct TxEip1559 {

the only difference is the codec impl

reth/crates/primitives/src/transaction/eip1559.rs

Line 11 in 67f6176

#[main_codec]

we can implement codec by doing the same as for

reth/crates/storage/codecs/src/alloy/withdrawal.rs

Lines 6 to 11 in 67f6176

	/// Withdrawal acts as bridge which simplifies Compact implementation for AlloyWithdrawal.
	///
	/// Notice: Make sure this struct is 1:1 with `alloy_eips::eip4895::Withdrawal`
	#[main_codec]
	#[derive(Debug, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Default)]
	struct Withdrawal {

TODO

• replace EIP1559
• replace EIP2930
• replace legacy
• replace EIP4844
• replace 7702
• optimism deposit

This should be done in separate prs and involves

• move existing struct def to https://github.com/paradigmxyz/reth/blob/67f617646ce4b68a5096239238aa9209636ff500/crates/storage/codecs/src/alloy/transaction.rs#L1-L1 impl codec for alloy types via into/from
• phase out primitive transaction defs

there are likely missing/renamed functions in alloy, so we need to surface those and add to alloy if appropriate

[leruaa]

I can take this on.

[mattsse]

cool, this will likely be a bit painful, see #9485 for ref
we likely need to do some work on rlp for this

[leruaa]

@mattsse Looking into this, it seems I will have to convert from reth Signature to alloy one at many places. Do you think I should work on migrating reth Signature to alloy as a prerequisite to this issue, or converting is ok for now?

For instance in the code below, I would like to call encoded_len_with_signature() on alloy TxLegacy that takes an alloy signature as a parameter:

reth/crates/primitives/src/transaction/pooled.rs

Lines 303 to 306 in cbe9a7c

	Self::Legacy { transaction, signature, .. } => {
	// method computes the payload len with a RLP header
	transaction.payload_len_with_signature(signature)
	}

[emhane]

is the end goal to replace reth_primitives::PooledTransactionsElement with alloy_consensus::TypedTransaction ? if so we'd be more efficient if we tackle this by making types that use reth_primitives::PooledTransactionElement generic over a type T: alloy_consensus::Transaction. do we have a complete list of types we want to replace with its alloy equivalent?

[emhane]

T: alloy_consensus::Transaction + <the codec trait>, and impl the codec trait for alloy types where we define the codec trait