Skip to content
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

[GRPH-49] get_account_history fix #69

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 6, 2019
Merged

[GRPH-49] get_account_history fix #69

merged 6 commits into from
Sep 6, 2019

Conversation

gladcow
Copy link

@gladcow gladcow commented Aug 21, 2019

Backports Bitshares fix bitshares/bitshares-core#398 and adds unit tests for this fix.

* THE SOFTWARE.
*/
/*
* Copyright (c) 2019 PBSA, and contributors.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this should be placed on top in the line of Cryptonomex.

#include <fc/smart_ref_impl.hpp>
#include <fc/crypto/digest.hpp>


Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can avoid double newlines.

auto dan_acc = create_account("dan");
auto bob_acc = create_account("bob");


Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know this new lines are also in bitshares, from the code is coming from. I think we can remove them, also sent pull request at bitshares for it bitshares/bitshares-core#1955

Copy link

@oxarbitrage oxarbitrage left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not totally sure of what we should do here but i am thinking on directly add a new patch that was added to the same function(get_account_history) in bitshares at bitshares/bitshares-core#628 on top of the one you added.

Also i think it might worth to add the additional history api tests from bitshares:
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/blob/master/tests/tests/history_api_tests.cpp#L86
This defines how the pagination for the call works(what results and what order you will get when calling with different stop and start arguments).

Copy link

@bobinson bobinson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@gladcow - please look into the changes requested by @oxarbitrage

@gladcow
Copy link
Author

gladcow commented Aug 26, 2019

I've addressed the issues found by @oxarbitrage , re-review, please.

@bobinson bobinson self-requested a review August 27, 2019 18:25
Copy link

@bobinson bobinson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • Please start Gitflow from from develop branch
  • Send the PR to develop

reference: https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows/gitflow-workflow

git checkout develop
git checkout -b feature/GRPH-49
git checkout develop
git merge feature/GRPH-49

or use git flow extension

@bobinson bobinson added the Changes Requested Changes Requested via review label Aug 27, 2019
@gladcow gladcow changed the base branch from beatrice to develop August 28, 2019 12:51
@gladcow
Copy link
Author

gladcow commented Aug 28, 2019

I've redirected PR to develop branch. Re-review, please

* Copyright (c) 2019 PBSA, and contributors.
*/
/*
* Copyright (c) 2015 Cryptonomex, Inc., and contributors.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is still wrong. Just keep 1: Copyright (c) 2019 PBSA, and contributors. Put it in the line where Copyright (c) 2015 Cryptonomex, Inc., and contributors. is.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In my opinion remove the Cryptonomex line fully and leave only the PBSA one :)

@bobinson bobinson self-requested a review September 6, 2019 19:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Changes Requested Changes Requested via review merged
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants