Skip to content

Conversation

@ddoktorski
Copy link
Collaborator

Closes #1197

Introduced changes

  • Function to calculate checksum address
  • Function to validate if an address is its checksum address

Implementation in other SDKs:

Tests were taken mostly from ContractAddressCalculatorTest in starknet-jvm.

  • This PR contains breaking changes

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 7, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (d35a04a) 98.05% compared to head (87094a0) 98.06%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           development    #1215   +/-   ##
============================================
  Coverage        98.05%   98.06%           
============================================
  Files               90       90           
  Lines             4741     4755   +14     
============================================
+ Hits              4649     4663   +14     
  Misses              92       92           
Files Coverage Δ
starknet_py/hash/address.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
starknet_py/hash/utils.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@tomek0123456789 tomek0123456789 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! 💯

@tomek0123456789 tomek0123456789 merged commit 2924e15 into development Nov 7, 2023
@tomek0123456789 tomek0123456789 deleted the ddoktorski/1197-checksum-address branch November 7, 2023 14:29
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.

Consider implementing to_checksum_address method

3 participants