You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We tried to use the the price webosocket endpoint with the jsonrpc library of parity.
We could not manage to make it work because the subscribe endpoint is expected to provide a subscription ID straight in the result field of the rpc response. But the current implementation is wrapping the ID in an object with a subscription field.
We checked various websocket subscription implementations over JSONRPC and all of them were answering with the ID straight in the result field.
I updated the endpoint to be compliant with the common implementation PR #20 (I also linked many known implementations of it which are behaving correctly).
Any chance we get this merged? I don't know whether there are more stuff to change so feel free to give a strong review on my changes.
NOTE: even your website is using the common implementation for the price feed :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thank you for filing this detailed issue and making the PR as well.
While I think the current pythd JSON-RPC interface technically conforms to the JSON-RPC 2.0 Spec (https://www.jsonrpc.org/specification), I agree that it is breaking from some common usage patterns, as you have identified.
We will be happy to merge the PR and make these changes at some point, but we would like to wait until things have quieted down a bit, as this will be a breaking change.
Hi everyone!
We tried to use the the price webosocket endpoint with the jsonrpc library of parity.
We could not manage to make it work because the subscribe endpoint is expected to provide a subscription ID straight in the
result
field of the rpc response. But the current implementation is wrapping the ID in an object with asubscription
field.We checked various websocket subscription implementations over JSONRPC and all of them were answering with the ID straight in the
result
field.I updated the endpoint to be compliant with the common implementation PR #20 (I also linked many known implementations of it which are behaving correctly).
Any chance we get this merged? I don't know whether there are more stuff to change so feel free to give a strong review on my changes.
NOTE: even your website is using the common implementation for the price feed :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: