Docs: fix UFix64, Fix64 and Address in types tables
#1073
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
It seems that the `UFix64` and `Fix64` type arguments are not correctly represented if you pass them as arguments with the `t.UFix256` or `t.Fix256` type respectively. After a quick look in `types.js` it seems that the library doesn't even know about those types. Passing in `t.UFix64` and `t.Fix64` as a type seems to work just fine. https://github.com/onflow/fcl-js/blob/master/packages/types/src/types.js It also seems that an `Address` typed argument needs to be passed in with the `t.Address` type instead of the `t.String` type as suggested in the docs. This PR additionally fixes the formatting/styling for the `path` type at the very end of the table in the docs.
marcoroth
requested review from
JeffreyDoyle,
10thfloor,
gregsantos,
chasefleming and
justinbarry
as code owners
chasefleming
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2022
JeffreyDoyle
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It seems that the
UFix64andFix64type arguments are not correctlyrepresented if you pass them as arguments with the
t.UFix256ort.Fix256type respectively.After a quick look in
types.jsit seems that the library doesn't evenknow about those types. Passing in
t.UFix64andt.Fix64as a typeseems to work just fine.
It also seems that an
Addresstyped argument needs to be passed inwith the
t.Addresstype instead of thet.Stringtype as suggestedin the docs.
This PR additionally fixes the formatting/styling for the
pathtypeat the very end of the table in the docs.