Generate a Libraries struct
#255
Merged
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
e00E
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2020
fleupold
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2020
generate/src/contract/deployment.rs
Outdated
| let link = { | ||
| let link_libraries = libs.iter().map(|name| { | ||
| let name_lit = Literal::string(&name); | ||
| let field = util::safe_ident(&name.to_snake_case()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: since this logic is shared with the loop above, how about making the one above return a pair of (lib_struct_fields, link_libraries)?
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR generates a
Librariesstruct with named fields for each library. This makes things like the order in which the libraries are specified not matter and makes the API much less error prone.This PR was made possible because of the recent change to generate all the code in a module (w00t) and is a much simple solution to the proposed new linking API. As such this PR closes #144
and closes #96.
I created #254 to capture the second half of #96 which is still not implemented.
Test Plan
Updated example 😄