refactor(x/bank): move validate basic checks to msg server #15782
Conversation
github-prbot
requested review from
a team and
kocubinski
and removed request for
a team
| { | ||
| desc: "submitted bad as gov prop", | ||
| expSimPass: false, | ||
| expPass: false, | ||
| msgs: []sdk.Msg{ | ||
| badGovProp, | ||
| }, | ||
| accSeqs: []uint64{2}, | ||
| expInError: []string{ | ||
| "invalid denom: bad coin name!", | ||
| "invalid proposal message", | ||
| }, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This case executes in endblocker after proposal pass, cannot catch here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With the removal of validate basic, is there a way to verify the proposal message is correct before its execution? That's a pretty unhandy drawback imho.
We need to find a way to improve submit proposal CLI for avoiding that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
user should be simulating to verify, isnt this enough?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For other messages, yes, absolutely, but not for messages with nested messages (like gov or group proposal) I do not think it will work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just talked with atheesh, We think we should extend simulations to support nested messages because more and more apps are using nested messages with delayed execution
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This makes sense and would solve the issue indeed
julienrbrt
added
the
A:automerge
…os-sdk into ap/remove-bank-validatebasic
…os-sdk into ap/remove-bank-validatebasic
Description
ref: #15648
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
!to the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.mdReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
!in the type prefix if API or client breaking change