[WIP] Call access controller directly, not via Coordinator #3501
Conversation
nucypher/blockchain/eth/actors.py
Outdated
| ciphertext_header=bytes(ciphertext_header), | ||
| ): | ||
| ritual = self._resolve_ritual(decryption_request.ritual_id) | ||
| abi = """[ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume that you already have plans to relocate this for readability?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah absolutely. In fact, this was actually bait for you 🤠 It desperately needs a grander idea for creating agents out of known ABIs but with addresses known at runtime. This will be useful for instantiating contracts that have a known interface or are generated by a factory. As you can see here, I just hardcoded the abi and used web3py directly for the contract, but an agent-like entity would be best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I knew something was bait-like about this :-).
Yes - I clearly see the need for such an interface. I have a few ideas about how to build this I'll try to whip something up.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## v7.4.x #3501 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.94% 84.91% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 123 123
Lines 11397 11400 +3
==========================================
- Hits 9681 9680 -1
- Misses 1716 1720 +4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
KPrasch
force-pushed
the
v7.4.x
branch
4 times, most recently
from
16d1acd to
073cbd5
Compare
…y be made cleaner, but in the interim it allows the tests to pass.
|
Subsumed by #3535. The commits were cherry-picked into that PR. |
Type of PR:
Required reviews:
What this does:
Issues fixed/closed:
Why it's needed:
Notes for reviewers: