This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 6, 2020. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
Cleanup some code in Aura #11466
Merged
ordian
merged 2 commits into
master
from
dp/chore/cleanup-and-docs-for-aura-empty-steps
Feb 10, 2020
Merged
Cleanup some code in Aura #11466
ordian
merged 2 commits into
master
from
dp/chore/cleanup-and-docs-for-aura-empty-steps
Feb 10, 2020
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Nothing really interesting here, renames or removes some methods. Adds some docs and extends a test a bit to clarify the behaviour of the code.
dvdplm
added
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
M4-core ⛓
Core client code / Rust.
A2-insubstantial 👶
Pull request requires no code review (e.g., a sub-repository hash update).
labels
Feb 7, 2020
ordian
approved these changes
Feb 7, 2020
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.
Looks good modulo one question.
|
||
if let Ok(c) = self.upgrade_client_or("could not broadcast empty step message") { | ||
self.store_empty_step(empty_step); | ||
c.broadcast_consensus_message(empty_step_full_rlp(&signature, &empty_step_rlp)); |
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 don't know if it makes any difference, but previously a message was broadcasted before storing it and irregardless of whether client upgrade ref was successfull
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.
Indeed, I think that behaviour is slightly suspicious. I have no proof that it was wrong, but I think the new behaviour is safer.
niklasad1
reviewed
Feb 10, 2020
Co-Authored-By: Niklas Adolfsson <[email protected]>
niklasad1
approved these changes
Feb 10, 2020
dvdplm
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 10, 2020
* master: Use parity-crypto updated to use upstream rust-secp256k1 (#11406) Cleanup some code in Aura (#11466) upgrade some of the dependencies (#11467) Some more release track changes to README.md (#11465) Update simple one-line installer due to switching to a single stable release track (#11463) update Dockerfile (#11461) Implement EIP-2124 (#11456)
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Labels
A0-pleasereview 🤓
Pull request needs code review.
A2-insubstantial 👶
Pull request requires no code review (e.g., a sub-repository hash update).
M4-core ⛓
Core client code / Rust.
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.
Nothing really interesting here, renames or removes some methods. Adds some docs and extends a test a bit to clarify the behaviour of the code.