Tool 393 add relayer v 3 support #543

danielailie · 2024-12-12T08:41:31Z

No description provided.

popenta · 2024-12-12T10:08:31Z

src/proto/serializer.ts

+        if (transaction.relayer && !transaction.relayer.isEmpty()) {
+            protoTransaction.Relayer = transaction.relayer.getPublicKey();
+            protoTransaction.RelayerSignature = transaction.relayerSignature;
+        }


Let's extract to a function similar to the guardian check above, and also check if relayer signature is set.

we discussed about this internally and said it is not needed

popenta · 2024-12-12T10:10:42Z

src/transaction.spec.ts

+    it("should serialize transaction with relayer", async () => {
+        const transaction = new Transaction({
+            chainID: networkConfig.ChainID,
+            sender: wallets.alice.address.bech32(),


use toBech32(), here and bellow.

popenta · 2024-12-12T10:13:07Z

src/transaction.ts

+    /**
+     * The relayer, in address format, next version all the other addresses will not be string anymore.
+     */
+    public relayer?: Address;


maybe this doesn't need to be optional. Make it optional on the constructor and if not provided, set to Address.empty()?

popenta · 2024-12-12T10:16:01Z

src/transactionComputer.ts

+    applyRelayer(transaction: ITransaction, relayer: Address) {
+        transaction.relayer = relayer;
+    }


this is kind of useless since one can simply do:

transaction.relayer = relayerAddress;

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T09:58:37Z

src/converters/transactionsConverter.ts

            chainID: transaction.chainID.valueOf(),
            version: transaction.version,
            options: transaction.options == 0 ? undefined : transaction.options,
+            relayer: !transaction.relayer || transaction.relayer.isEmpty() ? undefined : transaction.relayer.toBech32(),


We should have relayer and guardian done in the same way. Which way should we choose?

Oh, now I see, cannot be same as guardian, since that's a string 👍

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:06:46Z

src/converters/transactionsConverter.ts

            nonce: BigInt(object.nonce),
            value: BigInt(object.value || ""),
            receiver: object.receiver,
+            relayer: object.relayer ? Address.newFromBech32(object.relayer) : Address.empty(),


Can we have it the same as guardian? If so, which way?

Oh, now I see, cannot be same as guardian, since that's a string 👍

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:07:58Z

src/proto/serializer.ts

            protoTransaction.GuardianSignature = transaction.guardianSignature;
        }

+        if (transaction.relayer && !transaction.relayer.isEmpty()) {


Can refactor to have a mini private function isRelayedTransaction (for symmetry) .

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:12:00Z

src/transaction.ts

    public guardian: string;

+    /**
+     * The relayer, in address format, next version all the other addresses will not be string anymore.


Can be rephrased.

The relayer address. Note: in the next major version, `sender`, `receiver` and `guardian` will also have the type `Address`, instead of `string`.

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:12:38Z

src/transaction.ts

        this.version = Number(options.version?.valueOf() || TRANSACTION_VERSION_DEFAULT);
        this.options = Number(options.options?.valueOf() || TRANSACTION_OPTIONS_DEFAULT);
        this.guardian = options.guardian ? this.addressAsBech32(options.guardian) : "";
+        this.relayer = options.relayer?.isEmpty() ? undefined : options.relayer;


Oh, now I see, cannot be same as guardian, since that's a string 👍

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:15:34Z

src/transactionComputer.ts

        transaction.guardian = guardian;
    }

+    applyRelayer(transaction: ITransaction, relayer: Address) {


In sdk-py, we don't have it:

https://github.com/multiversx/mx-sdk-py/blob/feat/next/multiversx_sdk/core/transaction_computer.py#L83

Should we have it?

https://github.com/multiversx/mx-sdk-specs/blob/main/core/transaction_computer.md

I suggest we delete it from specs, as well. It is useless.

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:17:24Z

src/transactionComputer.ts

+    }
+
+    isRelayedV3Transaction(transaction: ITransaction) {
+        if (transaction.relayer && !transaction.relayer.isEmpty()) {


Can use a one-line return (can also stay as it is).

andreibancioiu · 2024-12-12T10:20:48Z

src/transaction.ts

+    /**
+     * The relayer, in address format, next version all the other addresses will not be string anymore.
+     */
+    public relayer?: Address;


Indeed, optional - I see we have the same in PY 👍

https://github.com/multiversx/mx-sdk-py/blob/feat/next/multiversx_sdk/core/transaction.py#L49

MWFIAE · 2025-01-20T14:55:54Z

@danielailie @andreibancioiu

What about the RelayedTransactionsFactory? It does not contain a createRelayedV3Transaction method, that was included in previous versions.

Was that an oversight or is it by design?

danielailie · 2025-01-21T13:20:50Z

Hello @MWFIAE,
For the relayedV3 we don't need a special method all we need to do is to pass the relayer and the relayerSignature on the factory
The js cookbook was not updated yet but here you can see an example from the py sdk and on js is similar https://docs.multiversx.com/sdk-and-tools/sdk-py/sdk-py-cookbook/#relayed-transactions

danielailie added 3 commits December 11, 2024 22:43

Add relayer support

cfa0d5c

Bump version

a971849

Generate proto file

642b00a

danielailie self-assigned this Dec 12, 2024

popenta reviewed Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

andreibancioiu reviewed Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

danielailie added 3 commits December 12, 2024 12:43

Update Relayer not to be optional

b810a2a

FIx typo

d132706

Fix compile errors

684e44d

popenta approved these changes Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

andreibancioiu approved these changes Dec 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

danielailie merged commit 9bc160b into main Dec 12, 2024
4 checks passed

danielailie deleted the TOOL-393-add-relayer-v-3-support branch December 12, 2024 11:28

Tool 393 add relayer v 3 support #543

Tool 393 add relayer v 3 support #543

Uh oh!

Conversation

danielailie commented Dec 12, 2024

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MWFIAE commented Jan 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

danielailie commented Jan 21, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

MWFIAE commented Jan 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading