Move AuthorizationContext into SDK and add address method #951
Conversation
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 reverts commit c1b2b37.
leighmcculloch
changed the title
dmkozh
approved these changes
May 18, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What
Move AuthorizationContext into the SDK, renamed to AuthContext, and add method
AuthContext::contract()that returns theAddressfor the contract in the context.Why
I removed
BytesN<32>everywhere I could for contract IDs, but AuthorizationContext still has to contain a BytesN<32> because the environment generates the value and the environment hasn't been updated yet to use Address everywhere.I had changed
Addressto disallow creating it fromBytesN<32>so that we have developers go all in onAddress. To have theAuthorizationContextgive the user anAddressit needs to be in the SDK so it can call the privateAddress::from_contract_idfunction.I renamed the type because we use the term
Authin docs and most places, so the long form seems unnecessary.Moving the type is probably a good long term move given that auth is a core concept, there's little need to separate auth logic into a separate crate now. I left the auth test utility in the separate crate to address separately.