tg-valset: Returning created rewards contract address #261
Conversation
| @@ -320,6 +320,12 @@ pub enum RewardsDistribution { | |||
| DistributeFunds {}, | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Clone, PartialEq, JsonSchema, Debug)] | |||
| #[serde(rename_all = "snake_case")] | |||
| pub struct InstantiateResponse { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
<nit> This would better be called InstantiateReplyResponse, or perhaps ReplyInstantiateResponse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why? It is response for instantiate (from the caller point of view). Internally it comes from the reply function but it is only because of how we model responding, but semantically it is just async handler for the subcall, which is not relevant to whoever triggered initial instantiation (there would not be any other response from instantiation than this one).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right. I've just realised they are the same, while working on the multitest executor (see CosmWasm/cw-plus#515).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not use the standard MsgInstantiateContractResponse then, by the way?
It's defined in the recent cw-plus 0.10.1. And under parse_reply... :-/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is different. It is not MsgInstantiateContractResponse, which is data returned by x/wasm.
This is the JSON data the contract returns to the runtime. (To be parsed by the Go module)
|
Oh, I thought this already passed tests (and that it wasn't a Draft). Will take another look later on. |
hashedone
force-pushed
the
248-distribution-contract-addr-improvement
branch
from
09f4f33 to
8ee3b77
Compare
hashedone
force-pushed
the
248-distribution-contract-addr-improvement
branch
from
8ee3b77 to
f215032
Compare
| let resp = Response::new().set_data( | ||
| resp.write_to_bytes() | ||
| .map_err(|err| ContractError::Proto(err.to_string()))?, | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is tricky. We have three nested levels of data here.
| rewards_contract: Addr::unchecked(res.get_contract_address()), | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| let mut resp = MsgInstantiateContractResponse::new(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, you don't need to add this info. This is added by x/wasm. Just encode your contract info. The following is sufficient:
let data = InstantiateResponse {
rewards_contract: Addr::unchecked(res.get_contract_address()),
};
let resp = Response::new().set_data(to_binary(&data));
Ok(resp)The contract doesn't have full access. It is run in a sandbox and it's output (data, events) are processed before shown to consumers.
| @@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ pub enum ContractError { | |||
| #[error("{0}")] | |||
| AdminError(#[from] AdminError), | |||
|
|
|||
| #[error("{0}")] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can be removed, we don't need to proto encode.
| @@ -320,6 +320,12 @@ pub enum RewardsDistribution { | |||
| DistributeFunds {}, | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Clone, PartialEq, JsonSchema, Debug)] | |||
| #[serde(rename_all = "snake_case")] | |||
| pub struct InstantiateResponse { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is different. It is not MsgInstantiateContractResponse, which is data returned by x/wasm.
This is the JSON data the contract returns to the runtime. (To be parsed by the Go module)
Closes #248