fix: support encodable receipt to use alloy calculate_receipt_root#74
fix: support encodable receipt to use alloy calculate_receipt_root#74pedrohba1 wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
…xample works from this
suchapalaver
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pedrohba1 see my suggestions. But also, let's revert the original change in another PR before we do this, as discussed 🙏
| } | ||
|
|
||
| impl Typed2718 for FullReceipt { | ||
| fn ty(&self) -> u8 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please give this a more meaningful name 🙏
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one I unfortunately cannot change the name. I need this ty function from Typed2718 from alloy-eip. Looks weird, but alloy-eip does call a type ty , which is quite annying that now we have tx_type , r#type and ty all in 3 different external crates which means the same in all.
On our codebase though it seems to be always tx_type, I'm good with it.
I could do this though:
impl FullReceipt {
pub fn transaction_type(&self) -> u8 {
self.ty() // Calls the `Typed2718` implementation
}
}
impl Typed2718 for FullReceipt {
fn ty(&self) -> u8 {
self.tx_type.ty()
}
}But I don't think it is necessary since we can already use full_receipt.tx_type the way the code is in the way it is implemented.
This is the PR attempting to the original change. it does revert the please-release merge, I ask for some attention into reading the PR, because I proposed keeping some of the changes in another PR linked there. |
|
@pedrohba1 converting this to draft while there are still CI failures 👍 |
Example now works from this. Although, this leaves
state_rootunused. Should I just remove the unused code in this case?