chore: Replies test contract #2306
Conversation
kulikthebird
force-pushed
the
tkulik/replies_test_contract
branch
5 times, most recently
from
157902d to
a06d4f1
Compare
kulikthebird
force-pushed
the
tkulik/replies_test_contract
branch
4 times, most recently
from
b0360f0 to
99b92a3
Compare
kulikthebird
force-pushed
the
tkulik/replies_test_contract
branch
from
99b92a3 to
c99e48c
Compare
| msg: to_json_binary(&next_msg).unwrap(), | ||
| funds: vec![], | ||
| }; | ||
| let mut msg_id: u64 = msg.msg_id.into(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it intentional that this uses the parent's msg_id field instead of next_msg.msg_id?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good question. Short answer is: yes, it was intentional. I double-checked the test scenarios in wasmd and it seems that it doesn't matter which of those two information is chosen for the reply ID. If we find a valid scenario where this will matter then we can change that in this contract.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My main reason for asking is that it confused me a little while reading the wasmd tests.
For example the first test result is: 0xee, 0x1, 0xee, 0x2, 0xee, 0x3, 0xbb, 0x2, 0xbb, 0x1, 0xee, 0x4, 0xee, 0x5, 0xbb, 0x4, 0xbb, 0x1
There's two times 0xbb, 0x1 in there, once for message 2 and once for message 4, but it's not immediately clear which one was when. But then in this case it makes sense that it would have to be 2 and then 4, since 4 wasn't even executed when the first 0xbb, 0x1 came in, so I guess it's fine.
kulikthebird
force-pushed
the
tkulik/replies_test_contract
branch
3 times, most recently
from
02d9c23 to
91079ed
Compare
kulikthebird
force-pushed
the
tkulik/replies_test_contract
branch
from
91079ed to
24c6561
Compare
No description provided.