-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
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
Update x/gov to use Any #6147
Update x/gov to use Any #6147
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6147 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 54.78% 54.78%
=======================================
Files 446 446
Lines 27079 27079
=======================================
Hits 14834 14834
Misses 11196 11196
Partials 1049 1049 |
@alexanderbez I think I've addressed all your review feedback. Let me know if there is anything else |
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.
Good work. Some nits, personal preference (pp) and small change requests (req) on the code. I did not look into tests or doc this time due to time constraints.
codec/amino.go
Outdated
} | ||
|
||
func (cdc *Codec) MustMarshalBinaryBare(o interface{}) []byte { | ||
err := cdc.marshalAnys(o) |
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.
nit: it would be easier to read and maintain the code if you would just call MustMarshalBinaryBare
as the name suggests and handle the error instead of duplicating the logic.
(Same for the other MustXXXX methods(
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.
Okay, I think I understand what you mean and addressed
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.
ups, should have been "call MarshalBinaryBare
". sorry
// UnpackInterfaces implements UnpackInterfacesMessage.UnpackInterfaces | ||
func (s SearchTxsResult) UnpackInterfaces(unpacker types.AnyUnpacker) error { | ||
for _, tx := range s.Txs { | ||
err := types.UnpackInterfaces(tx, unpacker) |
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.
Q: types.UnpackInterfaces
returns nil
when the Tx
does NOT implement UnpackInterfacesMessage
. Do you need to handle this case to be on the safe side? Alternatively you could move UnpackInterfacesMessage
into the Tx
interface so that this scenario does not exist.
This question also applies to other UnpackInterfaces
methods.
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.
It makes sense to handle this because in general it will be implemented. We could update the Tx
interface but I don't think we want to impose that requirement more generally right now.
|
||
// UnpackInterfaces implements UnpackInterfacesMessage.UnpackInterfaces | ||
func (r TxResponse) UnpackInterfaces(unpacker types.AnyUnpacker) error { | ||
return types.UnpackInterfaces(r.Tx, unpacker) |
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.
Q: Same as SearchTxsResult. UnpackInterfaces
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.
Yes, in general it will be implemented on Tx
@@ -326,7 +326,10 @@ $ %s tx gov submit-proposal --title="Test Proposal" --description="My awesome pr | |||
|
|||
content := types.ContentFromProposalType(proposal.Title, proposal.Description, proposal.Type) | |||
|
|||
msg := types.NewMsgSubmitProposal(content, amount, cliCtx.GetFromAddress()) | |||
msg, err := types.NewMsgSubmitProposal(content, amount, cliCtx.GetFromAddress()) |
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.
PP: I am very happy to see errors returned. For bonus points you could add some context via errors.Wrap(err, "")
to the naked errors. A single word helps already a lot when tracing down issues. Especially when there are multiple error return statements (not the case here).
func (m *MsgSubmitProposal) GetContent() Content { | ||
content, ok := m.Content.GetCachedValue().(Content) | ||
if !ok { | ||
return nil |
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.
Req: The CachedValue can be nil (in tests for example). It would be consistent to unpack the Any type.
Q: I am wondering about the interface cast: When m.Content
is nil then nil makes sense as a result but when "CachedValue" does not implement the Content
interface why returning nil instead of an error. This case should not happen with proper use of SetContent but m.Content
is public so can be anything.
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.
Is there a better approach you would suggest?
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.
🤔 Ah, you don't have access to the unpacker without changing the method signature....
I guess you don't want to add it as a parameter but rely on the stack to initialize the object proper. As a safety net I would add the following conditions so that the method can not return anything inconsistent.
func (m *MsgSubmitProposal) GetContent() Content {
if m.Content == nil {
return nil
}
cv := m.Content.GetCachedValue()
if cv == nil {
panic("content was not unpacked")
}
content, ok := cv.(Content)
if !ok {
panic(fmt.Sprintf("illegal type: %T", cv))
}
return content
}
@@ -48,9 +50,49 @@ func (p Proposal) String() string { | |||
return string(out) | |||
} | |||
|
|||
func (p Proposal) GetContent() Content { | |||
content, ok := p.Content.GetCachedValue().(Content) |
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.
Same comment as with MsgSubmitProposal.GetContent
// UnpackInterfaces implements UnpackInterfacesMessage.UnpackInterfaces | ||
func (p Proposal) UnpackInterfaces(unpacker types.AnyUnpacker) error { | ||
var content Content | ||
return unpacker.UnpackAny(p.Content, &content) |
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.
Req: content
may implement UnpackInterfacesMessage
that needs to be called.
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.
UnpackAny
will call those recursively
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.
ACK
|
||
// Codec defines a wrapper for an Amino codec that properly handles protobuf | ||
// types with Any's | ||
type Codec struct { |
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.
will this be deprecated in the future in favor of AminoCodec
? are there any difference between the 2?
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.
In the ADR updates in this PR I noted that we would rename this to LegacyAmino
. It is more or less deprecated. The difference between the two is that Marshaler
expects types that implement ProtoMarshaler
(i.e. generated by protoc). So any code using Marshaler
is more or less ensured to be proto compatible. This legacy Codec
is pure amino.
* **all new code should use `Marshaler` which is compatible with both amino and | ||
protobuf** | ||
|
||
Also, before v0.39, `codec.Codec` will be renamed to `codec.LegacyAmino`. |
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.
we should this as a deprecation note on the codec.Codec
godoc too.
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.
Adding a deprecated note to the godoc
cdc.RegisterConcrete(&MsgSubmitProposal{}, "cosmos-sdk/MsgSubmitProposal", nil) | ||
cdc.RegisterConcrete(MsgDeposit{}, "cosmos-sdk/MsgDeposit", nil) | ||
cdc.RegisterConcrete(MsgVote{}, "cosmos-sdk/MsgVote", nil) | ||
cdc.RegisterConcrete(&TextProposal{}, "cosmos-sdk/TextProposal", nil) | ||
} | ||
|
||
func RegisterInterfaces(registry types.InterfaceRegistry) { | ||
registry.RegisterImplementations((*sdk.Msg)(nil), |
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.
what's the difference of RegisterImplementations
with RegisterInterface
?
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.
RegisterInterface
also adds a public facing name to the interface. It is intended to be called the first time an interface is declared. The fact that it also takes some implementations was added as a convenience so now they're pretty similar.
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.
Changes LGTM 👍 thanks @aaronc!
* Update x/gov to use Any * Fixes * Remove MsgSubmitProposalLegacy * Update CHANGELOG.md * Add RegisterInterfaces for x/distribution, x/params, & x/upgrade * Fix query JSON issue * Fix gov tests * Revert custom Any Equals * Re-remove types * Rename receivers * Fix imports in gov * Sort imports * Make amino JSON signing work with Any * Run proto-gen * Create full amino wrapper * Fix errors * Fixes * Fix tests * Test fixes * Fix tests * Linting * Update ADR 019 and CHANGELOG * Updated ADR 019 * Extract Marshal/UnmarshalProposal * fix error * lint * linting * linting * Update client/keys/parse.go Co-authored-by: Marko <marbar3778@yahoo.com> * linting * Update docs/architecture/adr-019-protobuf-state-encoding.md Co-authored-by: Alexander Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> * Update docs/architecture/adr-019-protobuf-state-encoding.md Co-authored-by: Alexander Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> * Address review feedback * Add godocs * Fix errors * fix errors * revert file * Address review feedback * Address review feedback * Stacktrace debug flag * Fix tests * Address review feedback Co-authored-by: sahith-narahari <sahithnarahari@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Marko <marbar3778@yahoo.com> Co-authored-by: Alexander Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com>
ref: #6081
codec.Codec
a wrapper aroundamino.Codec
rather than an alias. This is to support protobufAny
s. All legacy code is required to use this rather thanamino.Codec
directlygov.Proposal
andgov.MsgSubmitProposal
types to useAny
forContent
InterfaceModule
forx/gov
,x/distribution
,x/params
, andx/upgrade
gov.GenesisState
proto compatible (Genesis Protobuf Migration #5917)For contributor use:
docs/
) or specification (x/<module>/spec/
)godoc
comments.Unreleased
section inCHANGELOG.md
Files changed
in the Github PR explorerFor admin use:
WIP
,R4R
,docs
, etc)