Auth method 3 #54
Auth method 3 #54
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some more ASM comments. It's just too tricky to do non-trivial ASM blocks this way. I think we need to rethink how we expect them to be used, perhaps provide a stricter context. Like they must be standalone functions, rather than embedded in other functions, or something.
|
@otrho Re: asm |
|
This has seen a significant refactor by @adlerjohn , including:
Still to do:
|
|
Should finally be ready |
| } else { | ||
| let unwrapped = result.unwrap(); | ||
| if let Sender::ContractId(v) = unwrapped { | ||
| assert(v == expected_id); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test isn't perfect because of this assert which shouldn't be here, but the compiler panics if removed. Could be a compiler bug, will investigate later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit contrived... ideally the test contracts would just pass the Result returned by msg_sender() along to the rust tests and compare the returned values there.
But, I was having issues with contracts returning nested struct/enums (MissingData error when using abigen macro) and so I simplified the return values and make comparisons in the contracts themselves. This is also why we need to pass in the expected_id value.
It feels hacky but works...
Implements the third auth method (owners of all coin inputs are the same).