-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
Remove proxy and manager contracts and packages #444
Remove proxy and manager contracts and packages #444
Conversation
This reverts commit 454acd7.
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 sure why we have msgs
, types
and responses
in separate files for the account? Is it something we want to follow with other contracts as well?
I kind of like the current convention we have as well. pub mod state {
// Constants
// Types
}
// Messages
// Responses |
…-remove-proxy-and-manager-contractsmods
/// Add the message's data to the response | ||
pub fn forward_response_data(result: Reply) -> AccountResult { | ||
// get the result from the reply | ||
let res = result.result.into_result().map_err(StdError::generic_err)?; | ||
|
||
// log and add data if needed | ||
let resp = if let Some(data) = res.data { | ||
AccountResponse::new( | ||
"forward_response_data_reply", | ||
vec![("response_data", "true")], | ||
) | ||
.set_data(data) | ||
} else { | ||
AccountResponse::new( | ||
"forward_response_data_reply", | ||
vec![("response_data", "false")], | ||
) | ||
}; | ||
|
||
Ok(resp) | ||
} |
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.
@CyberHoward do we even need this method in cosmwasm 2? Won't it be possible to get data from the new field of SubMsgResponse: https://docs.rs/cosmwasm-std/latest/cosmwasm_std/struct.SubMsgResponse.html#structfield.msg_responses? Let's mark this method as deprecated for reminder as well if so
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 it's the same behavior here, because it's still a nested execution.
We could have a test for thoses two cases, but I don't think it's deprecated yet
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.
Asked for clarification here : CosmWasm/cosmwasm#2253
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.
@CyberHoward do we even need this method in cosmwasm 2? Won't it be possible to get data from the new field of SubMsgResponse: https://docs.rs/cosmwasm-std/latest/cosmwasm_std/struct.SubMsgResponse.html#structfield.msg_responses? Let's mark this method as deprecated for reminder as well if so
Yeah I removed the allow(deprecated)
But we should do this in a different PR imo.
… of github.com:AbstractSDK/abstract into nicolas/abs-513-remove-proxy-and-manager-contractsmods
This PR aims at removing the manager and proxy contracts completely from the repository
Checklist