Conversation
| return call; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| export function expandConstructors <ApiType extends ApiTypes, R extends ISubmittableResult> (constructors: AbiMessage[], ns: Namespaced<BlueprintDeploy<ApiType>>, tx: MapConstructorExec<ApiType>, creator: (constructorOrId: AbiConstructor | string | number, options: BlueprintOptions, params: unknown[]) => SubmittableExtrinsic<ApiType, R>): void { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At the moment ink! doesn't plan to support namespaced constructors, so maybe we can remove that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consistency. It is easier when it is exactly the same everywhere from a maintenance perspective.
If in this case the namespace is single level, so be it. If it changes, it is catered for. Importantly- there are no implementation differences.
|
When do you plan to merge that change?=) |
|
There needs to be a full end-to-end test done with the apps UI for V1, V2 & V3 contracts with this change in. Once verified, it can be merged. (The same applies to the other PRs that are marked WIP, they look sane but have not been tested end-to-end) |
|
This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging 089ba53 into 756f817 - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
|
This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging 9c2cdc8 into 6c3bd2f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
2 participants
No description provided.