Feature add indexed recursive inscriptions endpoint #3936
Conversation
twosatsmaxi
changed the title
| @@ -232,6 +232,10 @@ impl Server { | |||
| "/r/children/:inscription_id/inscriptions", | |||
| get(Self::child_inscriptions_recursive), | |||
| ) | |||
| .route( | |||
| "/r/children/:inscription_id/inscriptions/at/:index", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We dont need /inscriptions/ in the route it is too verbose and is plural. We are only returning a single Id here.
We should follow the format of the first child endpoint not the second one. I never got around to doing this feature on the original child endpoint I was going to but ran out of time.
- "/r/children/:inscription_id/inscriptions/at/:index",
+ "/r/children/:inscription_id/at/:index",| )); | ||
| assert_eq!(child_json.id, latest_child_inscription_id); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need test for /at/0 which would be the first child inscription. As well as /at/1 which is the second child. This checks the off by one error we had in the original sat endpoint PR see discussion about that here
Look at the sat endpoint for reference of /at/:index tests:
|
Upon further review I don't think there is any benefit of limiting ourself to using the Struct If we used |
On second thought I think we should only return the ID. |
|
@raphjaph can you have a look once? |
I'm a bit confused with the lack of hype for |
|
@raphjaph @casey can you have a look once and also what do you think about comments by @elocremarc? would like your inputs too before going ahead make those changes, makes sense too me. |
Fixes #3923