Removed outdated section of primary package.json and add jsdoc comments#2303
Removed outdated section of primary package.json and add jsdoc comments#2303amoweolubusayo wants to merge 12 commits intoethereum-optimism:developfrom
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 19e1709 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 4 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
Add jsdoc comments to functions in contract package
| } | ||
|
|
||
| export const getContractFactory = ( | ||
| //returns the interface,bytecode and signer of a given contract by name. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are non standard jsdoc comments, usually they go above the function definition with a particular format
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep like @tynes said, here's an example of a standard jsdoc comment:
optimism/packages/core-utils/src/optimism/alias.ts
Lines 14 to 19 in 3525635
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you so much! My bad. I would correct my PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
New comments look great! Thank you :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got the new comments..would work on those! Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done. changeset added and rebase done.
Add jsdoc comments to contract-defs.ts
smartcontracts
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking good, great job! Two quick things to resolve:
- Let's add a changeset for the contracts package so that your new jsdoc comments are published as part of the
@eth-optimism/contractspackage. You can see instructions for how to do this here. - Let's also combine all of these changes into one commit that uses the conventional commit format. You can do this by running the command
git rebase --interactiveand following the instructions that appear there.
|
|
||
| export const getContractDefinition = (name: string): any => { | ||
| /** | ||
| * Gets the contract's artifact |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's a nit, but I think this should have a period after it for consistency.
This is what was done in the example given in @smartcontracts review:
optimism/packages/core-utils/src/optimism/alias.ts
Lines 14 to 19 in 3525635
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for pointing that out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are merge conflicts.. Am I to resolve that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To do that, I would:
- fix the conflicts in package.json
- rerun
yarn, which will overwrite the yarn.lock file with the correct contents.
Also don't forget to combine the commits per the comment above. :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks! I have made the updates
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Checks are failing. What can I do?
rename getContractDefinition to getContractArtifact
Fixed typescript linting error in contract-defs.ts
|
@amoweolubusayo sorry but it looks like you'll have to pull from master again, and then please also combine all of these changes into one commit that uses the conventional commit format. You can do this by running the command |
|
Hey @amoweolubusayo! This PR has merge conflicts. Please fix them before continuing review. |
|
This PR is stale because it has been open 14 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
… actors (#2303) ## Description This PR does some structural services to the `RollupNodeService` trait, in particular: - It ensures we're only passing static configurations/builders to the `NodeActor`s and offsets the building process to the `NodeActor` itself. - Each actor now has an associated builder. This unifies the terminology between `*Builder`s and `*Launcher`s which seemed to refer to the same concept. - This allows to simplify the `RollupNodeService` trait by having: - less constraints on the configurations accepted by the `NodeActors`. - having simpler associated methods which are basically just getters over some fields of the `RollupNode`. No need for async associated methods anymore or error handling. - The only `.await` we're using is to spin up the actors once they're initiated.
## Description This PR refactors the RPC actor in light of #2303 to unify its interactions with the other actors. Simplifies a little bit the way we handle RPC arguments by removing the `RpcBuilder` and move the `RpcModule` handling inside the `RpcActor`
## Description This PR refactors the RPC actor in light of #2303 to unify its interactions with the other actors. Simplifies a little bit the way we handle RPC arguments by removing the `RpcBuilder` and move the `RpcModule` handling inside the `RpcActor`
Description
A clear and concise description of the features you're adding in this pull request.
Additional context
Add any other context about the problem you're solving.
Metadata