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

Add a New Way To Issue Events/Attribute To x/wasm #265

Closed
loloicci opened this issue Jan 25, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

Add a New Way To Issue Events/Attribute To x/wasm #265

loloicci opened this issue Jan 25, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@loloicci
Copy link
Contributor

loloicci commented Jan 25, 2023

This issue add a new way to issue events/attributes to x/wasm. The aim of it is mainly

  • add a new way to issue events/attributes as same as lbm-sdk's way (issuing to context)
  • enable dynamic linked function (callable point) issues events/attributes
  • unify how to issue events/attributes between dynamic linked functions and other functions

This issue will be solved with some PRs. These changes is done in dynamic link branch and merged into main with dynamic link branch.

Add Event Manager To Context Data of Instance Environment

Add EventManager to context_data of instance.env and enable issing events/attributes to it via Deps.api

(#266)

Use The Event Manager's Infomation In x/wasm

  • remove events and attributes fields from the Response (the returning value of instantiate, execute, migrate, and etc...)
  • add events/attributes fields to API of wasmvm (for x/wasm) and use it from x/wasm
  • pass EventManager's information to above field

(Finschia/wasmvm#88)

Copy the EventManager Between Dynamic Link Callee/Caller

(#269 and Finschia/wasmvm#89)

@zemyblue
Copy link
Member

In this case, can we use default event way in the contract?
And is it backwards compatible?

@loloicci loloicci changed the title Change How To Issue Events/Attribute To x/wasm Add a New Way To Issue Events/Attribute To x/wasm Jan 31, 2023
@loloicci
Copy link
Contributor Author

In this case, can we use default event way in the contract?
And is it backwards compatible?

Thank you for your comment. In the 2nd part, the backward compatibility of contracts was broken. I reconsidered and found we should keep the backward compatibility with v1.0.0 contracts, so I changed the 2nd part of this issue.

@loloicci
Copy link
Contributor Author

closed via #266, Finschia/wasmvm#88 and #273

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants