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

[Chore] Refactor .unwrap() with Match in /ol/util folder #1193

Open
0xzoz opened this issue Nov 2, 2022 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #1257
Open

[Chore] Refactor .unwrap() with Match in /ol/util folder #1193

0xzoz opened this issue Nov 2, 2022 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #1257

Comments

@0xzoz
Copy link
Collaborator

0xzoz commented Nov 2, 2022

Bounty - 2000 GAS

What is the issue

During the development of the initial implementation of 0L. Work was done quickly to meet deadlines and because of this .unwrap() was used in some instances to speed up development. These need to be cleaned up.

What needs to be done?

  • Go through the /ol/util folder in the root and remove instances of .unwrap() by refactoring the code and adding a match statement. This may include refactoring of related files that the code is coupled to.

Intention

This issue is part of the Tool Scrubbers Guild

The idea behind this issue is to create manageable first tasks for relatively novice prospective developers looking to learn more about Rust and 0L. Not all of the unwraps will need to be refactored and part of the exercise is determining if the .unwrap() could be refactored or if they are already best practice depending on the situation

@0xzoz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

0xzoz commented Nov 2, 2022

@mortonbits this is where the subfolder from #1144 has been moved. Could you please confirm if you are still doing this task, completed(tag PR if you have) or if are no longer going to complete it. Thanks

@0xzoz 0xzoz added this to the v6.5.0 milestone Nov 2, 2022
@shawnharmsen
Copy link
Contributor

I'd love to take a stab at this, will add a PR shortly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants