-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 294
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
app: 💸 a mock consensus spend is performed #3891
Merged
cratelyn
merged 4 commits into
main
from
kate/mock-consensus-test-sends-valid-binding-sig
Feb 27, 2024
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
a passing thought, but this part of the API is pretty long-winded. we talked a bit about this in our sprint planning meeting today, but i'd love to see a more convenient way to go about this for future test authors, without introducing a third planner API.
that is a design conversation that shouldn't block this PR, though.
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.
The API we'd like to use is the
Planner
in the view crate. We'd need to be able to pass theMockClient
to its plan() method: https://rustdoc.penumbra.zone/main/penumbra_view/struct.Planner.html#method.planThere 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.
x-ref #3896, i think?
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.
Clarification post 54c0b35 , where the transaction plan creation becomes much simpler: my point is that for simple tests, where we can write down the complete transaction plan explicitly, we should do so. In this case, we can, which is what 54c0b35 does.
If we need to do more complex test logic, test logic that is complex enough that we cannot simply write down the plan, then we should decide on a way to use the
Planner
API to plan transactions, rather than have another set of helper methods for generating plans. This may involve pulling in the full rust view server implementation, or continuing to use theMockClient
. But for simple cases it's important to be able to test the chain logic without all the complexity of the rust view server.