-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 205
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 CIP-66 receipt field feeInFeeCurrency #2292
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Coverage from tests in coverage: 49.7% of statements across all listed packagescoverage: 63.4% of statements in consensus/istanbul coverage: 42.9% of statements in consensus/istanbul/announce coverage: 54.8% of statements in consensus/istanbul/backend coverage: 0.0% of statements in consensus/istanbul/backend/backendtest coverage: 24.3% of statements in consensus/istanbul/backend/internal/replica coverage: 62.1% of statements in consensus/istanbul/core coverage: 50.0% of statements in consensus/istanbul/db coverage: 0.0% of statements in consensus/istanbul/proxy coverage: 64.2% of statements in consensus/istanbul/uptime coverage: 51.8% of statements in consensus/istanbul/validator coverage: 79.2% of statements in consensus/istanbul/validator/random |
core/types/receipt.go
Outdated
FeeInFeeCurrency *big.Int | ||
} | ||
|
||
type preCIP66receiptRLP struct { |
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.
Maybe we should keep the old structures untouched for easier maintenance and use a specifically-typed structure for the new TX type.
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 receipt types are a bit confusing, technically here the old ones are untouched, and this one is only used for CELO denominated txs, as seen in the Receipts encode index (and decode as well).
But it's true that it feels like a weird change from this perspective
…st for CELO denominated txs to use it
bd06858
to
77c1b22
Compare
Add the receipt field for CELO denominated txs
Add e2etest for CELO denominated txs
Fix minor bugs in tx JSON marshalling
Remove e2e tests pertaining previous fork activation