Conversation
Coverage report
Click to see where and how coverage changed
This report was generated by python-coverage-comment-action |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
| class MultisigTransactionsFactory: | ||
| def __init__(self, config: TransactionsFactoryConfig, abi: Optional[Abi] = None) -> None: | ||
| self._sc_factory = SmartContractTransactionsFactory(config, abi) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be decided - can be either inheritance or composition, but we should stick to the same choice in both JS and PY.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We've decided to go with inheritance, but as we've seen, that is not really possible here. Added the workaround discussed, to simply add the create_transaction_for_execute method from the SmartContractTransactionsFactory.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the controllers, don't forget to also "export" query().
| function: Optional[str] = None, | ||
| arguments: Optional[list[Any]] = None, | ||
| ) -> Transaction: | ||
| if not function: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Slightly different from JS (regarding the named constructors of ProposeTransferExecuteContractInput) - if possible, we should have similar implementations.
Also - naming ProposeTransferExecuteContractInput (JS) vs. ProposeTransferExecuteInput (PY).
Though, which one to choose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, the parameters are the same. I'd go for ProposeTransferExecuteInput.
| TransferTransactionsFactory, | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In JS, it seems there are no named constructors, and the corresponding logic is moved to the factories themselves.
Either way is fine, but perhaps we should have a similar implementation. I know it cannot be the same, of course (especially since the ABI components differ a bit).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
moved most of the logic out of the resources file.
| pass | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class EsdtTokenPayment(StructValue): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it work if we use a regular Python class (not a StructValue)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it does not if the abi is not provided
| if is_list_of_typed_values(args): | ||
| return self.serializer.serialize_to_parts(args) | ||
|
|
||
| if all(isinstance(arg, bytes) for arg in args): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like the best fallback possible.
3 participants
No description provided.