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

Transform UniFFI SecurityShieldBuilder to value type semantics #312

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

danvleju-rdx
Copy link
Contributor

To improve the handling of TCA state in the iOS host, we need to transform the UniFFI SecurityShieldBuilder to use value type semantics, similar to how the TransactionBuilder is implemented in radix-engine-toolkit.

This change means that every mutating function will return a new instance of SecurityShieldBuilder.

@danvleju-rdx danvleju-rdx marked this pull request as draft December 20, 2024 10:01
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.3%. Comparing base (4870dd8) to head (b663671).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #312   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   93.3%   93.3%           
=====================================
  Files       1111    1111           
  Lines      24182   24240   +58     
  Branches      79      79           
=====================================
+ Hits       22570   22628   +58     
  Misses      1597    1597           
  Partials      15      15           
Flag Coverage Δ
kotlin 97.1% <ø> (ø)
rust 92.8% <100.0%> (+<0.1%) ⬆️
swift 94.8% <100.0%> (-0.1%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
.../Profile/MFA/SecurityShieldBuilder+Swifified.swift 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...mfa/security_structures/security_shield_builder.rs 95.2% <100.0%> (+1.2%) ⬆️

@danvleju-rdx danvleju-rdx marked this pull request as ready for review December 20, 2024 14:57
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.

2 participants