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 json decorator #1482

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Oct 25, 2023
Merged

Refactor json decorator #1482

merged 15 commits into from
Oct 25, 2023

Conversation

DaughterOfMars
Copy link

Description of change

Refactors the @json decorator so that the methods can be overridden by defining a class method, and remove some unnecessary overrides.

Links to any relevant issues

Closes #1473

@DaughterOfMars DaughterOfMars linked an issue Oct 20, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@DaughterOfMars
Copy link
Author

Waiting for #1481

@thibault-martinez
Copy link
Member

#1481 has been merged

Copy link
Member

@thibault-martinez thibault-martinez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

CI failing

Copy link
Member

@Thoralf-M Thoralf-M left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ImplicitAccountCreationAddress still has _to_dict_custom

@thibault-martinez thibault-martinez changed the title refactor json decorator Refactor json decorator Oct 24, 2023
@DaughterOfMars DaughterOfMars requested a review from kwek20 October 25, 2023 13:44
@thibault-martinez thibault-martinez merged commit ef0e0e6 into 2.0 Oct 25, 2023
3 checks passed
@thibault-martinez thibault-martinez deleted the feat/refactor-json-decorator branch October 25, 2023 14:31
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.

Change _to_dict_custom() to class method?
5 participants