Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: add note on return value sizes in interfaces #3204

Closed
pcaversaccio opened this issue Dec 24, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #3205
Closed

docs: add note on return value sizes in interfaces #3204

pcaversaccio opened this issue Dec 24, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #3205

Comments

@pcaversaccio
Copy link
Collaborator

Add a note in the interface documentation regarding the following fact:

If we use interfaces via Vyper syntax, the following holds: For any input parameters, where you have to put a max threshold (eg. dynamic arrays, strings, bytes etc). the values defined in the interface reflect also the max threshold in the implementation. However, for any return values, if you need to define a max threshold in the interface, it reflects the lower bound in the implementation.

@pcaversaccio
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I will take care of this issue and will submit a PR.

@charles-cooper
Copy link
Member

charles-cooper commented Dec 25, 2022

note that we are planning to remove explicit bounds in interfaces in favor of ellipses quite soon - see #2814 (comment)

@pcaversaccio
Copy link
Collaborator Author

note that we are planning to remove explicit bounds in interfaces in favor of ellipses quite soon - see #2814 (comment)

That's why I write in the PR 'This behaviour might change in the future.' You want me to add something else?

@charles-cooper
Copy link
Member

That's why I write in the PR 'This behaviour might change in the future.' You want me to add something else?

no! just wanted to give a heads up to anybody following this issue.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants