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

Feature/upgrade lumos #387

Open
wants to merge 14 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Daryl-L
Copy link
Collaborator

@Daryl-L Daryl-L commented Dec 29, 2023

No description provided.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 31, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (69193f9) 65.48% compared to head (1fc3a1e) 65.48%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

❗ Current head 1fc3a1e differs from pull request most recent head 13f1ec1. Consider uploading reports for the commit 13f1ec1 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #387   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   65.48%   65.48%           
=======================================
  Files           6        6           
  Lines         226      226           
  Branches       48       48           
=======================================
  Hits          148      148           
  Misses         78       78           

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

@Daryl-L Daryl-L force-pushed the feature/upgrade_lumos branch 15 times, most recently from bb244d0 to 153527d Compare February 1, 2024 05:00
@Daryl-L Daryl-L force-pushed the feature/upgrade_lumos branch 2 times, most recently from ebf7526 to 8660ce4 Compare February 1, 2024 08:11
202, 200, 125, 162, 19, 177, 84,
182, 234, 225, 250, 79, 0, 118,
228, 185, 55, 81, 252, 66, 178,
228, 166, 244, 108
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

use the code hash instead of the type hash to make it keep the same between different devnets


toIndexerScript(): IndexerScript {
return { code_hash: this.codeHash, args: this.args, hash_type: this.hashType };
return codeHash === script.codeHash && args === script.args && hashType === script.hashType;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The args might be an Ethereum checksum address, it would be more robust to compare them by serialized result

bytes.equal(codeHash, script.codeHash) 
  && bytes.equal(args, script.args) 
  && hashType === script.hashType 

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.

3 participants