Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 22, 2024. It is now read-only.

support multiple transactions #706

Merged
merged 28 commits into from
Jul 3, 2023

Conversation

SantiagoPittella
Copy link
Collaborator

@SantiagoPittella SantiagoPittella commented Jun 28, 2023

Description

Add support for multiple transactions simulations at once.

Waiting for #703 to be finish.
Closes #700

Checklist

  • Linked to Github Issue
  • Unit tests added
  • Integration tests added.
  • This change requires new documentation.
    • Documentation has been added/updated.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jun 28, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #706 (37e4a2f) into main (3af21ba) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 98.73%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #706      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   92.11%   92.13%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          52       52              
  Lines       11360    11397      +37     
==========================================
+ Hits        10464    10501      +37     
  Misses        896      896              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/lib.rs 97.96% <98.70%> (+0.21%) ⬆️
src/transaction/invoke_function.rs 99.30% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Copy link
Collaborator

@juanbono juanbono left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add tests executing more than 1 transaction

Comment on lines +494 to +502
assert!(context[0].validate_info.is_some());
assert!(context[0].call_info.is_none());
assert!(context[0].fee_transfer_info.is_none());
assert!(context[1].validate_info.is_some());
assert!(context[1].call_info.is_none());
assert!(context[1].fee_transfer_info.is_none());
assert!(context[2].validate_info.is_some());
assert!(context[2].call_info.is_none());
assert!(context[2].fee_transfer_info.is_none());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe use a for?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

he performed loop unrolling (?)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

blazing fast tests

@SantiagoPittella SantiagoPittella added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 3, 2023
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a conflict with the base branch Jul 3, 2023
@SantiagoPittella SantiagoPittella added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 3, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit 3c9477c Jul 3, 2023
@juanbono juanbono deleted the multiple-transactions-simulation branch July 4, 2023 19:08
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

estimate_fee() and simulate_transaction() do not support multiple transactions
6 participants