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

refactor: remove header type from NewContext #17426

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Aug 21, 2023
Merged

Conversation

tac0turtle
Copy link
Member

Description

ref #17425


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • followed the guidelines for building modules
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • included comments for documenting Go code
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • run make lint and make test
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic
  • reviewed API design and naming
  • reviewed documentation is accurate
  • reviewed tests and test coverage
  • manually tested (if applicable)

@tac0turtle tac0turtle marked this pull request as ready for review August 18, 2023 14:14
@tac0turtle tac0turtle requested a review from a team as a code owner August 18, 2023 14:14
Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How often we need to pass a chain id? Looks like in most tests it isn't necessary.
Should we not use .WithChainID instead and remove it from the constructor?

types/context.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
types/context.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
types/context_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
baseapp/abci.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
baseapp/abci.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
baseapp/abci.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@testinginprod testinginprod left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, pending nits from @julienrbrt

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -156,6 +159,9 @@ func (c Context) WithBlockHeader(header cmtproto.Header) Context {
// https://github.com/gogo/protobuf/issues/519
header.Time = header.Time.UTC()
c.header = header

// when calling withBlockheader on a new context chainID in the struct is empty
c.chainID = header.ChainID
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we expect WithChainID to have the same behavior? (Set the chainID to the header?).
Currently in all SDK versions, it does not do it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

tbh this is weird, the chainID is in the header and on the struct, but they werent updated together, I think this is two bugs, first storing it twice second not updating or checking the other when updating one of them

Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt Aug 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1, I think this is a valid fix of WithBlockHeader / WithChainID that we can add to in least v0.50

Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm!

@tac0turtle tac0turtle added this pull request to the merge queue Aug 21, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit 393dcc1 Aug 21, 2023
49 of 51 checks passed
@tac0turtle tac0turtle deleted the marko/Comet_header branch August 21, 2023 16:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants