Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

shahak/sn writer client/remove transaction enum #905

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2023

Conversation

ShahakShama
Copy link
Contributor

@ShahakShama ShahakShama commented Jul 26, 2023

  • move writer client into reader client crate
  • fix(starknet_client): Use crate instead of super
  • refactor(starknet_client)!: remove Transaction and AddTransactionResponse (But keeping the variant structs)

This change is Reviewable

@ShahakShama ShahakShama force-pushed the shahak/sn_writer_client/remove_transaction_enum branch from 99582a3 to 7a53508 Compare July 26, 2023 07:09
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 26, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #905 (b63d675) into main (0cc8fe1) will decrease coverage by 0.10%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #905      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   73.81%   73.72%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files          53       53              
  Lines        4606     4612       +6     
  Branches     4606     4612       +6     
==========================================
  Hits         3400     3400              
- Misses        545      547       +2     
- Partials      661      665       +4     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
...yrus_gateway/src/v0_3_0/broadcasted_transaction.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rknet_reader_client/src/writer/objects/response.rs 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...et_reader_client/src/writer/objects/transaction.rs 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

Copy link
Contributor

@nagmo-starkware nagmo-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed 8 of 8 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dan-starkware, @ShahakShama, and @yair-starkware)


crates/starknet_reader_client/src/writer/objects/transaction.rs line 22 at r1 (raw file):

};

// Each transaction type has a field called `type`. This field needs to be of a type that

why not a part of the docs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@ShahakShama ShahakShama left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dan-starkware, @nagmo-starkware, and @yair-starkware)


crates/starknet_reader_client/src/writer/objects/transaction.rs line 22 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, nagmo-starkware wrote…

why not a part of the docs?

Done.

@ShahakShama ShahakShama force-pushed the shahak/sn_writer_client/remove_transaction_enum branch 3 times, most recently from c01ad41 to b95935e Compare July 27, 2023 06:44
@ShahakShama ShahakShama force-pushed the shahak/sn_writer_client/remove_transaction_enum branch from b95935e to b63d675 Compare July 27, 2023 07:05
Copy link
Contributor

@nagmo-starkware nagmo-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dan-starkware, @DvirYo-starkware, and @yair-starkware)

@ShahakShama ShahakShama added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 27, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit d01d0a3 Jul 27, 2023
17 checks passed
@ShahakShama ShahakShama deleted the shahak/sn_writer_client/remove_transaction_enum branch July 27, 2023 07:53
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 28, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants