[adapter][verifier] allow option and ID arguments in entry points

[tnowacki]

• This seemed easy to fix so I gave it a shot, I think it fits in nicely but

  • I wish this wasn't so special cased. Could be interesting to have some system in the future to automagically allow certain types
  • I think the general solution here is probably public constructors.... but that is a long long ways off IMO

• [Move] relax restrictions on allowed types in entrypoints #2049

• Allow options of "pure" values

• Allow ID as a "pure" value

• As discussed on the issue, I don't think string is a good fit right here due to the complexities around validation

[lxfind]

Nice. This works. But I wonder how does someone actually pass them in when making a Move call.

[tnowacki]

But I wonder how does someone actually pass them in when making a Move call.

A future PR... But it should be doable in the current CLI/builder
For ID, you can just pass an address.
For option, you should just be able to use a vector, either empty or a singleton

[kchalkias]

Will an Option<ID> work as well?

[tnowacki]

Yes

[kchalkias]

Yes and when the other PR (that uses it in Move calls) is ready, we can change example contracts that previously did address casting to ID and were refactored not to use Option

[kchalkias]

what is this comment about?

[tnowacki]

is id or... is option of a primitive (down below)

[kchalkias]

Thanks!

[sblackshear]

I do think passing an Option as an entrypoint argument is generally an anti-pattern (typically, it would be clearer to expose two different entrypoints instead), but I'm ok with supporting it.

[tnowacki]

I do think passing an Option as an entrypoint argument is generally an anti-pattern (typically, it would be clearer to expose two different entrypoints instead), but I'm ok with supporting it.

Interesting, I hadn't considered that. What's the thought/worry here?

[tnowacki]

I do think passing an Option as an entrypoint argument is generally an anti-pattern (typically, it would be clearer to expose two different entrypoints instead), but I'm ok with supporting it.

Interesting, I hadn't considered that. What's the thought/worry here?

@sblackshear, landing, but let me know the thoughts here or elsewhere