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

add Unknown transaction variant #810

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

hal3e
Copy link

@hal3e hal3e commented Sep 2, 2024

FuelLabs/fuels-rs#1477

BREAKING: Added Unknown transaction variant.

Checklist

  • Breaking changes are clearly marked as such in the PR description and changelog
  • New behavior is reflected in tests
  • If performance characteristic of an instruction change, update gas costs as well or make a follow-up PR for that
  • The specification matches the implemented behavior (link update PR if changes are needed)

Before requesting review

  • I have reviewed the code myself
  • I have created follow-up issues caused by this PR and linked them here

After merging, notify other teams

[Add or remove entries as needed]

@hal3e hal3e added the breaking A breaking api change label Sep 2, 2024
@hal3e hal3e self-assigned this Sep 2, 2024
@@ -102,6 +103,7 @@ pub enum Transaction {
Upgrade(Upgrade),
Upload(Upload),
Blob(Blob),
Unknown,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This kind of change should be done differently. From the protocol level, we don't have unknown transactions since it is impossible to do a state transition if the transaction is unknown.

A new variant should be handled by the code that may receive a new variant of the enum. Maybe you want to look into fuel-core-client since it is where you fetch transactions from the GraphQL.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the clarification.

@hal3e hal3e closed this Sep 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking A breaking api change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants