core: remove unused ContractCode method from BlockChain #27186
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
gballet
requested review from
karalabe,
holiman and
rjl493456442
as code owners
rjl493456442
approved these changes
Apr 28, 2023
|
Please rebase |
|
Ah nevermind |
shekhirin
pushed a commit
to shekhirin/go-ethereum
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2023
devopsbo3
pushed a commit
to HorizenOfficial/go-ethereum
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 10, 2023
devopsbo3
added a commit
to HorizenOfficial/go-ethereum
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 10, 2023
…reum#27186)" This reverts commit 317d990.
devopsbo3
added a commit
to HorizenOfficial/go-ethereum
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 10, 2023
…reum#27186)" This reverts commit 317d990.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Context : I'm looking into implementing stateless block execution in geth. One of the problems I see is that `(*state.Database).ContractCode expects the hash of the address instead of the address itself. This interface should be changed altogether in a different PR when I have figured all the details out.
While investigating the call tree for
(*state.Database).ContractCode, I noticed that(*BlockChain).ContractCodeisn't used anywhere, and it makes sense to remove it from the interface, lest someone starts using it in the future, and make the interface redesign more difficult.So this PR simply removes that method.