Skip to content
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

Sort class hashes in workflow #938

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 6, 2024

Conversation

ericnordelo
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@andrew-fleming andrew-fleming merged commit a66d6e7 into OpenZeppelin:main Mar 6, 2024
5 checks passed
@ericnordelo ericnordelo deleted the fix/workflow branch March 6, 2024 19:45
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ def generate_doc_file(cmp_version, contracts):
https://crates.io/crates/cairo-lang-compiler/{cmp_version}[cairo {cmp_version}]
"""
hashes = "// Class Hashes\n"
contracts['contracts'].sort(key=lambda x: x['name'])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

isn't this doing lexicographical sort?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

but weren't we favoring category grouping over alphabetical order?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We did open an issue for that, #934, but we are currently sorting alphabetically.

Copy link
Contributor

@martriay martriay Mar 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i guess find it a bit weird to open a PR with no associated issue that goes in a different direction than the issue we do have. instead i guess i would've addressed the issue directly or just leave it as it is, since i'm not sure alphabetical order is better than just whatever order until we address it. i guess it's not harmful so i wouldn't revert this either, i just wanted to understand the motivation

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i see now that the PR is also fixing the v in the CI. we should mention that in the issue/commit

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants