-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
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
Rework API #80
Rework API #80
Conversation
Left a few comments, I think this is definitely a good direction 👍 |
Co-authored-by: Abhishek Kumar <43061995+xenowits@users.noreply.github.com>
I'm relatively comfortable with the changes here, opening up for final review by interested parties prior to merging. |
Rename BeaconBlockBlobs to BlobSidecars.
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.
Overall, I think the changes are good to go!!
// String returns a string version of the structure. | ||
func (v *VersionedProposal) String() string { | ||
switch v.Version { | ||
case spec.DataVersionBellatrix: |
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.
Why are we not checking for phase0 blocks?
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.
This was the result of a partial implementation during the move to using proposals. Should now be fully updated with all forks.
// String returns a string version of the structure. | ||
func (v *VersionedSignedProposal) String() string { | ||
switch v.Version { | ||
case spec.DataVersionBellatrix: |
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.
Here as well, I believe we should add a switch case for phase0 version
Co-authored-by: Abhishek Kumar <43061995+xenowits@users.noreply.github.com>
Rework of API to meet new requirements. Main points:
api.Response[T]
wrapper to provide additional information with response dataThis is an alternative to #77 and has a wider scope. It also tidies up various rough edges that have existed in the implementation.
@Willyham please take a look and let me know what you think in terms of the changes. Note that these have not yet been applied across all APIs, that will be done prior to any merge but this should allow you to get the feel for the changes being made.