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

CU-86dtu91p0 - Include how to test smart contract storage using boa test constructor #1267

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 21, 2024

Conversation

luc10921
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@luc10921 luc10921 requested a review from meevee98 June 19, 2024 15:13
@luc10921 luc10921 self-assigned this Jun 19, 2024
@melanke
Copy link
Contributor

melanke commented Jun 19, 2024

@coveralls
Copy link
Collaborator

Coverage Status

coverage: 91.201%. remained the same
when pulling dc7cc3a on CU-86dtu91p0
into 9c903f9 on development.

# this is the prefix that the GAS smart contract uses to store the accounts and their balances
account_prefix = b'\x14'

# the return from get_storage needs to be casted to the expected type
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just to be clear: it does not need to be casted, the values are going to be processed as long the user gives a key_post_processor or a value_post_processor.

the casting here is just for the IDE handle the types correctly because the method is annotated with dict[bytes, bytes] as its return type

docs/source/testing-and-debugging.md Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/source/testing-and-debugging.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@coveralls
Copy link
Collaborator

Coverage Status

coverage: 91.201%. remained the same
when pulling 6c712d9 on CU-86dtu91p0
into 9e981cc on development.

@meevee98 meevee98 merged commit 269357b into development Jun 21, 2024
4 checks passed
@meevee98 meevee98 deleted the CU-86dtu91p0 branch June 21, 2024 18:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants