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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Integrate Evidence Implementation into ICS-02 #5258
Integrate Evidence Implementation into ICS-02 #5258
Changes from 2 commits
8dc7ee6
4553172
13b2dcc
9e5e0ec
3340173
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I need to double-check, but I don't think this TODO is necessary anymore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not against this change, but it breaks the standard module structure.
I like how @alexanderbez implemented the errors on the evidence module here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If i leave
errors.go
intypes/
, there wasn't a way for me to use those errors in thetypes/tendermint
package without creating an import cycle. This is why i split it into its own packageThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently the codebase is a mix of using the old errors (sdk.Error defined in
types
), and the new errors defined intypes/errors
. The current ICS-02 implementation uses the old sdk.Error, should I switch it to use new error type?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thoughts @alexanderbez ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So the approach I've taken in the evidence module PR and for future PRs is the following:
Return
error
where ever and as much as possible up and until I can no longer return anerror
. When I can no longer return anerror
, I callsdk.ConvertError(err)
which gives me the old (soon to be deprecated)sdk.Error
.Behind the scenes I'm returning a concrete type of
sdkerrors.New(...)
which fulfills theerror
interface and fulfills the ABCI semantics.so tl;dr, return
error
usingsdkerrors.New(...)
as much as possible until you cant.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can add the other fields here as well. We can implement the
String
function by using marshal yaml to bytes and then print them. We'd need to write a test for the expected string tho.