CLI signing improvements #2668
CLI signing improvements #2668
Conversation
Here we're either saving or sending a transaction (depending on `out`), but not both. Refs. #2664.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2668 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 85.12% 85.14% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 320 322 +2
Lines 39267 39398 +131
==========================================
+ Hits 33426 33547 +121
- Misses 4500 4515 +15
+ Partials 1341 1336 -5
📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor typo, otherwice LGTM.
And I have a question, currently, we can't provide arguments for deployed contract signature (if it requires parameters). Can't we extend existing signing interface to work with deployed contract with parameters? It would be nice to have it, maybe create a separate issue?
Deployed contracts have them in the manifest, so it should be used if needed. The bigger problem is custom contracts (I can have anything in my verification script) where parameters do need to be specified manually, there is no way around that. An issue, please (not a top priority, but can be done some day). |
We can technically have more signatures in the file than we need and it's OK, this case should be handled.
It's not needed, we already have the hash and getDecryptedAccount can't return an account for a different one.
And document the behavior better. Fixes #2664.
It can be both NEP-11 and NEP-17.
To strip keys from wallets.
It wasn't documented.
See documentation update for an example. Some code is made generic as well, GetCompleteTransaction can now be used directly on ParameterContext.
roman-khimov
force-pushed
the
cli-signing-improvements
branch
from
27d78c2 to
411ebdf
Compare
Problem
#2662, #2664
Solution
Solve 'em.