New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ERC1155 docs #920
ERC1155 docs #920
Conversation
Update error testing and remove tests failing from erc1155
…iro-contracts into feat/erc1155-#572
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.
Improvements look good! I left a few minor suggestions and we just have to fix conflicts. Otherwise, this looks ready to me!
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.
very nice and complete docs! left some comments
* xref:#ERC721Component-owner_of[`++owner_of(self, token_id)++`] | ||
* xref:#ERC721Component-safe_transfer_from[`++safe_transfer_from(self, from, to, token_id, data)++`] | ||
* xref:#ERC721Component-transfer_from[`++transfer_from(self, from, to, token_id)++`] | ||
* xref:#ERC721Component-approve[`++approve(self, to, token_id)++`] |
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.
isn't this adding a level of indirection?
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.
There's an indirection level but no added but this IMO. We had a direct link to the interface section, even when the interface doesn't have the full description like requirements, etc... We should add the full explanation of the method instead of a link to the interface as we are doing below. I think that's the scope of another PR, though.
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.
Continuing this discussion on this thread
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.
continued the convo in the other thread but isn't this going against what you said? this is adding a level of indirection and in the other thread you vouch for removing indirections
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.
IMO this should be pointing to ERC721Component, not directly to the interface, but the description shouldn't be pointing to the interface either, as it is currently doing. So the level of indirection added should be fixed by fixing the description, not by maintaining the previous link.
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.
understood. let's advance with your proposal but let's make sure we give it a proper thought and document the decision later on
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.
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.
great improvements!
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
… into docs/erc1155
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.
Left a tiny comment and a few suggestions with the recent changes. We're almost there!
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Martín Triay <martriay@gmail.com>
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.
LGTM!
This PR adds documentation for ERC1155, and fixes some inconsistencies in ERC721 docs.