remove pallet::getter from pallet-staking #6184
Conversation
| @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ impl<T: Config> Pallet<T> { | |||
|
|
|||
| let era_duration = (now_as_millis_u64.defensive_saturating_sub(active_era_start)) | |||
| .saturated_into::<u64>(); | |||
| let staked = Self::eras_total_stake(&active_era.index); | |||
| let staked = Self::eras_total_stake(active_era.index); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| let staked = Self::eras_total_stake(active_era.index); | |
| let staked = ErasTotalStake::<T>::get(&active_era.index); |
Part of the aim here is to replace any usage of Self::storage() with Storage::<T>::get() in the sdk codebase
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now it's done. I replaced these usages everywhere I was able to spot them.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// Get the preferences of a given validator. | ||
| pub fn validators<EncodedAccountId>(account_id: EncodedAccountId) -> ValidatorPrefs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kianenigma cargo expand shows that FRAME macros actually expand to these (seemingly over-) generic function signatures, is this just to allow args to be passed as a ref or value, or is there another reason? I guess we also need them here to not be a breaking change, or can we make assumptions about usage here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes it was the goal, it is mostly useful for types like tuples where you can pass a tuple of reference.
Here we can probably take a reference but it would be a breaking change indeed. Some people might be giving a reference some other might be giving the type itself.
The generic should be name EncodeLikeAccountId, because it is not yet encoded.
Description
Part of #3326
Removes all pallet::getter occurrences from pallet-staking and replaces them with explicit implementations.
Adds tests to verify that retrieval of affected entities works as expected so via storage::getter.
Review Notes
deriveattribute are used in tests (either directly or indirectly).#[pallet::call]and that requires#[pallet::call_index(0)]annotation on each function in that block. So I thought it's better to separate them.