You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Submessages (and their replies) are all executed before any messages
and gives an example:
Contract A returns submessages S1 and S2, and message M1
I think the "feeling" that this semantics document gives then is that when I call Response::add_submessages, these will be executed before messages I add with Response::add_messages. peeking inside of those methods though, the response type only has one message list, and says that those messages will get executed in order:
/// Optional list of messages to pass. These will be executed in order./// If the ReplyOn variant matches the result (Always, Success on Ok, Error on Err),/// the runtime will invoke this contract's `reply` entry point/// after execution. Otherwise, they act like "fire and forget"./// Use `SubMsg::new` to create messages with the older "fire and forget" semantics.pub messages:Vec<SubMsg<T>>,
which makes me think that is not the case, as both calls append to this list. it would be great to get some clarification on what the actual rules are here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
the CosmWasm semantics document says
and gives an example:
I think the "feeling" that this semantics document gives then is that when I call
Response::add_submessages
, these will be executed before messages I add withResponse::add_messages
. peeking inside of those methods though, the response type only has one message list, and says that those messages will get executed in order:which makes me think that is not the case, as both calls append to this list. it would be great to get some clarification on what the actual rules are here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: