refactor: use err to replace errCause #555
Conversation
WalkthroughThe recent changes to the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s) (Beta)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant Keeper
participant Context
participant EventManager
User ->> Keeper: MsgBridgeCallClaim
Keeper ->> Keeper: Process MsgBridgeCallClaim
alt Error Occurs
Keeper ->> Context: Emit Error Event with err.Error()
else No Error
Keeper ->> Context: Proceed with tokens
end
Context ->> EventManager: Emit Event
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.go (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.go (2)
35-35: Verify the conditional logic after refactoring.Also applies to: 48-48
Verification successful
The search results show numerous instances of the conditional check
if err != nilacross the codebase. However, to verify the specific refactoring in the filex/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.go, we need to ensure that the logic involvingerrandtokensis consistent and does not introduce any unintended behavior.To proceed, let's inspect the specific context around the lines in question (lines 35 and 48) in
x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.goto understand the refactoring changes and their implications.
The extracted lines provide context around the refactored conditional logic. The snippet shows that the condition
if err != nil && len(tokens) > 0is used to handle a specific case where an error occurred and there are tokens to process. This is followed by another conditionif err == nilto handle the case where no error occurred.To ensure the refactoring is correct and consistent, we need to verify that:
- The logic correctly handles the case where
erris notniland there are tokens.- The subsequent logic correctly handles the case where
errisnil.Given the context, the refactoring appears to be logically sound. However, to be thorough, let's check the entire function to ensure there are no other dependencies or conditions that might affect this logic.
The previous command did not produce any output, which means we couldn't extract the entire function for a thorough review. To ensure we have all the necessary context, let's try a different approach to extract the function definition and its body.
The extracted function
BridgeCallHandlerprovides the necessary context to verify the refactored conditional logic. Here is the relevant part of the function:func (k Keeper) BridgeCallHandler(ctx sdk.Context, msg *types.MsgBridgeCallClaim) error { k.CreateBridgeAccount(ctx, msg.TxOrigin) tokens := msg.GetTokensAddr() erc20Token, err := types.NewERC20Tokens(k.moduleName, tokens, msg.GetAmounts()) if err != nil { return err } refundAddr := msg.GetRefundAddr() cacheCtx, commit := ctx.CacheContext() if err = k.BridgeCallTransferAndCallEvm(cacheCtx, msg.GetSenderAddr(), refundAddr, erc20Token, msg.GetToAddr(), msg.MustData(), msg.MustMemo(), msg.Value); err != nil { ctx.EventManager().EmitEvent(sdk.NewEvent(types.EventTypeBridgeCallEvent, sdk.NewAttribute(types.AttributeKeyErrCause, err.Error()))) } else { commit() } if err != nil && len(tokens) > 0 { // new outgoing bridge call to refund outCall, err := k.AddOutgoingBridgeCall(ctx, refundAddr, refundAddr, erc20Token, common.Address{}, nil, nil, msg.EventNonce) if err != nil { return err } ctx.EventManager().EmitEvent(sdk.NewEvent( types.EventTypeBridgeCallRefundOut, sdk.NewAttribute(types.AttributeKeyEventNonce, fmt.Sprintf("%d", msg.EventNonce)), sdk.NewAttribute(types.AttributeKeyBridgeCallNonce, fmt.Sprintf("%d", outCall.Nonce)), )) } if err == nil { for i := 0; i < len(erc20Token); i++ { bridgeToken := k.GetBridgeTokenDenom(ctx, erc20Token[i].Contract) // no need for a double check here, as the bridge token should exist k.HandlePendingOutgoingTx(ctx, refundAddr.Bytes(), msg.EventNonce, bridgeToken) } } return nil }Analysis:
- Initial Error Check: The function first attempts to create
ERC20Tokensand returns an error if it fails.- Cache Context and EVM Call: It then creates a cache context and attempts to call
BridgeCallTransferAndCallEvm. If this call fails, it emits an event with the error cause.- Conditional Logic:
- If
err != nil && len(tokens) > 0: This condition handles the case where an error occurred during the EVM call, and there are tokens to process. It attempts to add an outgoing bridge call to refund and emits an event if successful.- If
err == nil: This condition handles the case where no error occurred. It processes eachERC20Tokenand handles pending outgoing transactions.Conclusion:
The refactored conditional logic appears to be correct and consistent with the intended behavior. The conditions are mutually exclusive and handle different scenarios appropriately.
- Lines to Verify:
- Line 35:
if err != nil && len(tokens) > 0- Line 48:
if err == nilFinal Response:
The conditional logic after refactoring is verified and appears to be correct. The conditions handle different scenarios appropriately and do not lead to unintended behavior.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the conditional checks involving `err` are correctly refactored and do not lead to unintended behavior. # Test: Search for similar conditional checks in the codebase to ensure consistency. rg --type go $'if err != nil'Length of output: 130708
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract the relevant lines from the file to understand the context of the refactoring. sed -n '30,50p' x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.goLength of output: 849
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract the entire function to ensure there are no other dependencies or conditions affecting the logic. ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func $_($_, $_) $_ { $$$ }' x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.goLength of output: 99
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract the function definition and its body from the file to ensure there are no other dependencies or conditions affecting the logic. rg --type go --context 10 'func ' x/crosschain/keeper/bridge_call_in.goLength of output: 3881
30-30: Ensure proper error handling and message clarity.
|
mg |
Summary by CodeRabbit