This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 6, 2020. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
arkpar
added
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
M4-core ⛓
Core client code / Rust.
labels
Sep 19, 2017
arkpar
commented
Sep 19, 2017
ethcore/types/src/receipt.rs
Outdated
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ impl Decodable for Receipt { | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
let first = rlp.at(0)?; | |||
if first.is_data() && first.data()?.len() == 1 { |
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.
"0" status code is actually zero bytes when RLP encoded
rphmeier
reviewed
Sep 19, 2017
ethcore/types/src/receipt.rs
Outdated
@@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ pub struct RichReceipt { | |||
pub log_bloom: LogBloom, | |||
/// State root | |||
pub state_root: Option<H256>, | |||
/// Status byte. Optional before EIP-658. | |||
pub status_code: Option<u8>, |
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.
since state root and status code are an either-or kind of thing, maybe it should be encoded as an enum instead of two separate fields? like
enum TransactionOutcome {
Unknown(Option<H256>), // optional state root because of eip98
Success,
Failure,
}
arkpar
added
A3-inprogress ⏳
Pull request is in progress. No review needed at this stage.
and removed
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
labels
Sep 19, 2017
arkpar
added
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
and removed
A3-inprogress ⏳
Pull request is in progress. No review needed at this stage.
labels
Sep 19, 2017
arkpar
force-pushed
the
receipt-fix
branch
2 times, most recently
from
September 20, 2017 09:50
3ec6640
to
4368229
Compare
tomusdrw
approved these changes
Sep 21, 2017
gavofyork
added
A8-looksgood 🦄
Pull request is reviewed well.
and removed
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
labels
Sep 21, 2017
arkpar
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 21, 2017
arkpar
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 21, 2017
I can confirm this fixed the issue for me, thanks so much! |
pedrobranco
pushed a commit
to uphold-forks/parity
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 29, 2017
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Labels
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.
Closes #6550