This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Allow renaming storage item prefixes #9016
Allow renaming storage item prefixes #9016
Changes from 3 commits
507c312
a1e75b2
c87e4d0
9ea8251
9d6a9e8
34fbf92
5277f7d
fc49baf
b8895a2
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
So this is all the magic right?
We either take the storage rename, or we fallback to the old ident
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's actually not here, but on the
prefix_struct_const
code, because that's the value that ultimately gets assigned toStorageItem::STORAGE_PREFIX
.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.
I think we might actually want to break the metadata here...
Maybe not right in this PR, but you can imagine someone will want to expose the name as "Balance" but use a custom prefix like "1".
As such, there would be a
name
property in the metadata, and aprefix
property.But this is something that would be much more annoying to merge in, and so probably should be an issue and we save it for when we already will break metadata.