-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
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
NEP-11 tracking #2266
NEP-11 tracking #2266
Conversation
There is a lot of similarity, so try reusing common code and use more neutral naming.
Setting NewNEPXXBatch avoids the need to get them from the database which is useful for newly tracked accounts.
Make it a bit more efficient.
Makes no sense storing empty ones.
5918033
to
b768f63
Compare
b768f63
to
0b9ed2a
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2266 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 84.10% 84.13% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 305 306 +1
Lines 29351 29696 +345
==========================================
+ Hits 24685 24984 +299
- Misses 3285 3299 +14
- Partials 1381 1413 +32
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
NewNEP11Batch: true, | ||
NewNEP17Batch: true, |
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.
I would prefer inverted DirtyNEP11Batch
flag to better handle defaults.
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.
Makes sense, but can be done later.
Standards are NEP-11 and NEP-17, not NEP11, not NEP17, not anything else. Variable/function names of course can use whatever fits, but documents and comments should be consistent wrt this.
We're using proper util.Uint160 values everywhere in the client.
0b9ed2a
to
f1145c8
Compare
We don't have divisible NFTs to test it completely, but that can wait until #1940.