-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
Add CLI command to list transactions for a given deployment #821
Conversation
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.
This is looking good. I left 3 comments.
b606030
to
745a80c
Compare
745a80c
to
1fb7c0f
Compare
); | ||
|
||
const networkInteraction = | ||
exState.networkInteractions[message.networkInteractionId - 1]; |
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.
This -1
caught me by surprise tbh. Do we always have the network interaction ids be 1, 2, 3, ...
TBH I don't remember, and I couldn't find it easily in the code.
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.
I search the code, and we normally do
const onchainInteraction = executionState.networkInteractions.find(
(interaction) => interaction.id === networkInteractionId
);
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.
The -1
is because i'm indexing it directly, not using a find
. As far as I know, we've always started the networkInteraction ID's at 1
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.
Left a minor comment, but otherwise LGTM
resolves #805