Skip to content
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

Remove ChannelEnd::order_matches() #394

Closed
plafer opened this issue Feb 1, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1095
Closed

Remove ChannelEnd::order_matches() #394

plafer opened this issue Feb 1, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1095
Labels
A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers A: low-priority Admin: low priority / non urgent issue, expect longer wait time for PR reviews O: maintainability Objective: cause to ease modification, fault corrections and improve code understanding
Milestone

Comments

@plafer
Copy link
Contributor

plafer commented Feb 1, 2023

We should use a match statement instead. This pattern encourages not looking at all possible variants, and shouldn't be used.

At the same time, we should understand what the Order::None represents, and if we keep it, what to do in cases where the order is None.

@plafer plafer added O: maintainability Objective: cause to ease modification, fault corrections and improve code understanding A: low-priority Admin: low priority / non urgent issue, expect longer wait time for PR reviews A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers labels Feb 1, 2023
@Farhad-Shabani Farhad-Shabani moved this to 📥 To Do in ibc-rs Feb 2, 2023
@DaviRain-Su
Copy link
Contributor

I think is ok, maybe can implement to seem this.

  pub fn order_matches(&self, other: &Order) -> bool {
        // self.ordering.eq(other)
        match (self.ordering, other) {
            (Order::None, Order::None) => true,
            (Order::Unordered, Order::Unordered) => true,
            (Order::Ordered, Order::Ordered) => true,
            _ => false,
        }
   }

@DaviRain-Su
Copy link
Contributor

截屏2023-06-01 17 20 56

Just search order_matches(), for now, pass param values is Order. We don't used any field.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 📥 To Do to ✅ Done in ibc-rs Feb 21, 2024
@Farhad-Shabani Farhad-Shabani added this to the 0.51.0 milestone Feb 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers A: low-priority Admin: low priority / non urgent issue, expect longer wait time for PR reviews O: maintainability Objective: cause to ease modification, fault corrections and improve code understanding
Projects
Status: Done
3 participants