Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
feat:
PrivateSet::pop_notes(...)
#7834feat:
PrivateSet::pop_notes(...)
#7834Changes from 5 commits
d61a978
b129931
b17e2be
f7a1603
20dccfc
2c1932d
b947da5
338ea22
36e1ac0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We never used the get_cards function out of the original removed cards so I just merged these 2 so that I could use pop_notes.
Looking at the function more I think there is a big inefficiency here now. The
filter_card
filter is applied in a constrained context (see constrain_get_notes_internal func) and therefore the notes obtained below are guaranteed to be properly filtered. Properly filtered here means that all the card notes returned correspond to some of the card from the cards arg. This however doesn't mean that all the cards from the cards arg were found. But it seems to me that it would be enough to just check that the num notes returned is equal to N.Since this contract is quite old I think it's possible that it was implemented in a time were filters were not constrained or smt. like that.
Am I missing something here?
Bothering @sirasistant as you wrote the contract.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I had noticed the same thing when I tried to do this some time ago. Keep in mind that we only started constraining the filter in #6703 - it was unconstrained before that.
Ultimately though I would not worry too much about this sample contract.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, but I feel like the contracts are used as an example for community so would say makes sense keeping them somewhat updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed. I went over this and I think you're right - just checking that the number of notes equals
N
should be enough here, since you only get the requested cards, and you only get each card once.The only thing that gives me pause here is that we'll be applying the filter to the entire set of 32 possible notes, which seems wasteful if we later set a lower limit. Perhaps we can later revisit
get_notes
to get it's max number of notes to be generic instead of the actual maximum.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice observation. Shall we create an issue for this?