shim: blob query #167
shim: blob query #167
Conversation
|
Current dependencies on/for this PR:
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. |
sugondat-shim/src/cli.rs
Outdated
| BlockRef::Number(n) => write!(f, "{}", n), | ||
| BlockRef::Hash(h) => write!(f, "0x{}", hex::encode(&h[..])), | ||
| } | ||
| fn decode_hash(input: &str) -> Result<Option<[u8; 32]>, String> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Would appreciate not mixing new features and refactorings
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not graphite-pilled enough to keep things that small. at the time, it would've required stacking on top of only some of the changes within the file, stashing the other ones, and then popping the stash to build on top of the refactored decoder
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fair enough. I suggested that because for me it seemed like a simple operation.
sugondat-shim/src/cmd/query/blob.rs
Outdated
| .block_hash(n) | ||
| .await? | ||
| .ok_or_else(|| anyhow::anyhow!("No block with number {}", n))? | ||
| .0, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
goddammit. I was trying to guard the API from precisely this thing and failed!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Specifically the .0 thing?
I did notice there's a comment in the sugondat_rpc file: "NOTE: we specifically avoid prolifiration of subxt types around the codebase. To that end, we avoid returning H256 and instead return [u8; 32] directly."
And yet, pub async fn block_hash(&self, height: u64) -> anyhow::Result<Option<H256>> returns the H256. Seems like an easy fix, though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, that's precisely what I meant. If you look at blame, my name will pop on both of those lines.
sugondat-shim/src/cmd/query/blob.rs
Outdated
| } else { | ||
| println!( | ||
| " Blob #{}, Namespace {}, {} bytes", | ||
| i + 1, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if it's a good idea to have the descrepancy between the cli input and here. In the CLI it's the zero-based and here it's 1-based.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The extrinsic index is zero-based, whereas the blob index is 1-based. if we need consistency between two (different) indexes, I would prefer they both be 0-based rather than 1-based.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Opened #170 & we can discuss there
rphmeier
force-pushed
the
rh-shim-block-query
branch
from
f79eecd to
93059ee
Compare
rphmeier
force-pushed
the
rh-shim-blob-query
branch
from
589760b to
110b39a
Compare
rphmeier
force-pushed
the
rh-shim-block-query
branch
from
93059ee to
7cae1e7
Compare
rphmeier
force-pushed
the
rh-shim-blob-query
branch
from
110b39a to
4b642aa
Compare
pepyakin
force-pushed
the
rh-shim-blob-query
branch
from
4b642aa to
1feca1e
Compare
No description provided.