-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
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
refactor(staking): add missing msgServer tests and move ValidateBasic() logic to msgServer #15820
Conversation
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
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.
Crazy that msg server wasn't tested. good catch!
I think we should not completely delete ValidateBasic
logic when it is used at multiple place. I would rename it for Validate
instead (so it does not match the interface but we can still avoid code duplication and possible future discrepancies). This case is only valid for the MsgCreateValidator
that we need to check at 3 places.
…ita/validatebasic-staking
…ita/validatebasic-staking
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.
let's move the cheap checks before any keeper calls.
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.
lgtm!
Description
ref: #15648
This PR moves
ValidateBasic()
logic to msgServer and adds missing msgServer testsAuthor Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
!
to the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.md
Reviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
!
in the type prefix if API or client breaking change