Config -> RuntimeConfig

[harrysolovay]

#226 states the intention to invert the flow of types. We initially planned to encapsulate all types (RPC and FRAME types) in a Config, which would flow through the DX. Now, we're going in the other direction (initial work in #229): type-safe bindings wrap the dynamic usage (potentially injecting pre-computed codecs, keys, misc.). This brings up some important questions: should we even bother encoding static type info in a Config?

Let's take a look at the current Config:

export class Config<
  DiscoveryValue = any,
  RpcCallMethods extends rpc.ProviderMethods = rpc.ProviderMethods,
  RpcSubscriptionMethods extends rpc.ProviderMethods = rpc.ProviderMethods,
  RpcErrorDetails extends rpc.ErrorDetails = rpc.ErrorDetails,
> {
  RpcMethods!: RpcCallMethods & RpcSubscriptionMethods;
  RpcCallMethods!: RpcCallMethods;
  RpcSubscriptionMethods!: RpcSubscriptionMethods;
  RpcErrorDetails!: RpcErrorDetails;

  constructor(
    readonly discoveryValue: DiscoveryValue,
    readonly addressPrefix: number,
  ) {}
}

What would happen if we got rid of the RPC phantoms?

export class RuntimeConfig<DiscoveryValue> {
  constructor(
    readonly discoveryValue: DiscoveryValue,
    readonly addressPrefix: number,
  ) {}
}

Of course, this would result in type errors in the current RPC client. Perhaps this is a good thing though... it does feel like too much typing at too low a level.

We can address this after #251.

[harrysolovay]

Closed as of #233