LIVE-12087 - Fix llm prepare sign tx #6759
Closed
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
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 5 Ignored Deployments
|
ComradeAERGO
changed the title
ComradeAERGO
changed the title
ComradeAERGO
force-pushed
the
fix_llm_prepareSignTx
branch
3 times, most recently
from
c67871c
to
c57dae3
Compare
ComradeAERGO
force-pushed
the
fix_llm_prepareSignTx
branch
from
f04da38
to
4e1c5eb
Compare
ComradeAERGO
requested review from
sprohaszka-ledger and
a team
and removed request for
a team
ComradeAERGO
force-pushed
the
fix_llm_prepareSignTx
branch
from
4e1c5eb
to
798b8cc
Compare
| @@ -21,23 +21,15 @@ describe("prepareSignTransaction", () => { | |||
| // Given | |||
| const parentAccount = createAccount("12"); | |||
| const childAccount = createTokenAccount("22", "js:2:ethereum:0x012:"); | |||
| const expectedResult: EvmTransaction = { | |||
| const expectedResult: Partial<EvmTransaction> = { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure that testing half of the expected result is enough.
The function is expected to return a full Transaction object, not a Partial one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is what the prepareSignTransaction returns
Justkant
reviewed
Apr 26, 2024
| ): TransactionCommon { | ||
| const bridge = getAccountBridge(account, parentAccount); | ||
| const t = bridge.createTransaction(account); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it okay to not go through the createTransaction anymore ?
I understand you made it the same as LLD but I think that some special defaults could be setup in this function IIRC
| @@ -21,23 +21,15 @@ describe("prepareSignTransaction", () => { | |||
| // Given | |||
| const parentAccount = createAccount("12"); | |||
| const childAccount = createTokenAccount("22", "js:2:ethereum:0x012:"); | |||
| const expectedResult: EvmTransaction = { | |||
| const expectedResult: Partial<EvmTransaction> = { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It feels a bit wrong to expect a partial transaction now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is what the prepareSignTransaction returns
3 tasks
|
Superseded by #6814 |
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.
✅ Checklist
npx changesetwas attached.Transactions creation with Wallet API on LLM
📝 Description & ❓ Context
Figment is having issues with
eth_sendTransactionon LLM (full details on the issue in this thread) and while investigating we figured the issue was coming from the way we are setting the customGasLimit here.The problem doesn't appear on LLD, and as you can see, the custom prepareSignTransaction function we were doing in LLM doesn't exist on LLD.
The change introduced by this PR sets the behavior of LLM on par with LLD in regard to tx preparation in Wallet API.
🧐 Checklist for the PR Reviewers