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

R4R: BaseApp Peer Review #3526

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Feb 8, 2019
Merged

R4R: BaseApp Peer Review #3526

merged 10 commits into from
Feb 8, 2019

Conversation

mossid
Copy link
Contributor

@mossid mossid commented Feb 6, 2019

cc @alexanderbez

  • Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md)

  • Linked to github-issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.

  • Wrote tests

  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/)

  • Added entries in PENDING.md with issue #

  • rereviewed Files changed in the github PR explorer


For Admin Use:

  • Added appropriate labels to PR (ex. wip, ready-for-review, docs)
  • Reviewers Assigned
  • Squashed all commits, uses message "Merge pull request #XYZ: [title]" (coding standards)

@jackzampolin
Copy link
Member

Should we open issues here?

@alexanderbez
Copy link
Contributor

I think we should address them in this PR.

@mossid mossid changed the title WIP: BaseApp Peer Review R4R: BaseApp Peer Review Feb 7, 2019
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 7, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #3526 into develop will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 67.85%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3526      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    59.63%   59.64%   +<.01%     
===========================================
  Files          131      131              
  Lines         9682     9691       +9     
===========================================
+ Hits          5774     5780       +6     
- Misses        3568     3571       +3     
  Partials       340      340

Copy link
Contributor

@cwgoes cwgoes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree with @jackzampolin; otherwise LGTM.

// NOTE: this changed in tendermint and we didn't notice...
return app.FilterPeerByPubKey(path[3])
cmd, typ, arg := path[1], path[2], path[3]
if cmd == "filter" {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

switch cmd instead?

@@ -805,12 +804,13 @@ func (app *BaseApp) runTx(mode runTxMode, txBytes []byte, tx sdk.Tx) (result sdk
ctx = newCtx.WithMultiStore(ms)
}

gasWanted = result.GasWanted
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reason for this change? Seems like this ordering might be significant...

Copy link
Member

@jackzampolin jackzampolin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One small question, but otherwise LGTM 👍

@jackzampolin jackzampolin merged commit 685bfca into develop Feb 8, 2019
@jackzampolin jackzampolin deleted the joon/baseapp-review branch February 8, 2019 01:52
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants