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

refactor(torii-client): remove storage packed size check #2116

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 28, 2024

Conversation

Larkooo
Copy link
Collaborator

@Larkooo Larkooo commented Jun 27, 2024

Packed size can now be 0 with the new layout, thus we cannot really trust the packed size to check that the number of provided values is correct. Remvoed the check

@Larkooo Larkooo changed the title Remove packed check refactor(torii-client): remove storage packed size check Jun 27, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 27, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.31%. Comparing base (2ea37a1) to head (7a30347).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2116      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.34%   68.31%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         331      331              
  Lines       41443    41404      -39     
==========================================
- Hits        28323    28286      -37     
+ Misses      13120    13118       -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@@ -86,28 +85,6 @@ impl ModelStorage {
raw_keys: Vec<FieldElement>,
raw_values: Vec<FieldElement>,
) -> Result<(), Error> {
let model_name =
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We could potentially check that, but only if the layout if Fixed, which means everything is packed as before, hence the values should match.

We can address specific tests for that in an other PR, since related to some changes to the namespace will need test too.

@Larkooo Larkooo merged commit 6193f22 into dojoengine:main Jun 28, 2024
15 checks passed
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