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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Removed amino folder #592
Removed amino folder #592
Changes from 18 commits
e243c70
007bb09
f7bd911
0b05bdb
4d55b61
9bcdbaf
d5cd63c
535e5a1
c66fe9d
428a369
631f5c2
da4db48
b46bc85
90ecfc8
66a3a54
8600b54
fcef436
8f9f0ba
696efd3
661e294
19dddbb
9fade2b
5a63cb9
3829909
665fe72
f5b1202
96b6f7f
8cc3d23
ff3cb43
2557cf4
54be939
1d84575
1e1255a
e2d3773
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we label these with something consistent so it's easy to find them in the future if we change how we handle this? Maybe should be an XXX or something easy to find...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good idea, although in this case it's more of a theoretical possibility than a real one.
You can get the biggest number with
high.value()==i64::MAX
and midpoint is going to bei64::MAX/2
in that case. So this is an unwrap case that can never fail, unless the developer changes the types without concern to the note.Maybe it's better to remove it, since it's theoretical only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not keep EXAMPLE_CHAIN or else why not make a variable for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uh, I'm not sure, it was completely fine as it was. I don't think it was changed by me, it seems it was changed when the commit.json was regenerated. (The previous one had
cosmoshub-2
as the chain ID and the current one isdockerchain
.) I don't mind it this way because most other assertions use constants to check validity. But we can revert to a const too.