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: move component communication to infra crate #378

Conversation

Itay-Tsabary-Starkware
Copy link
Contributor

@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware Itay-Tsabary-Starkware commented Jul 7, 2024

Stack:

⚠️ Part of a stack created by spr. Do not merge manually using the UI - doing so may have unexpected results.


This change is Reviewable

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jul 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.24%. Comparing base (c7fa63e) to head (65d0250).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #378      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.21%   83.24%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          36       36              
  Lines        1692     1695       +3     
  Branches     1692     1695       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         1408     1411       +3     
  Misses        209      209              
  Partials       75       75              

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

@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware Itay-Tsabary-Starkware force-pushed the pr/Itay-Tsabary-Starkware/tsabary/cleanups/4c9d9914 branch from 105e987 to 6ae3a08 Compare July 8, 2024 08:28
@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware Itay-Tsabary-Starkware force-pushed the pr/Itay-Tsabary-Starkware/tsabary/cleanups/4c9d9914 branch from 6ae3a08 to 8e64414 Compare July 8, 2024 10:05
Copy link
Contributor

@uriel-starkware uriel-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewable status: 0 of 3 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)


crates/mempool_infra/src/component_definitions.rs line 22 at r1 (raw file):

    pub fn take_tx(&self) -> Sender<T> {
        self.tx.to_owned().expect("Sender should be available, could be taken only once")

why to_owned and not take?

Code quote:

self.tx.to_owned()

crates/mempool_node/Cargo.toml line 20 at r1 (raw file):

starknet_gateway = { path = "../gateway", version = "0.0" }
starknet_mempool = { path = "../mempool", version = "0.0" }
starknet_mempool_infra = { path = "../mempool_infra", version = "0.0" }

Is this alphabetizing? Shouldn't be in different commit?


crates/mempool_node/Cargo.toml line 24 at r1 (raw file):

tokio.workspace = true
tracing-subscriber = { workspace = true, features = ["env-filter"] }
tracing.workspace = true

Is this alphabetizing? Shouldn't be in different commit?

@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware Itay-Tsabary-Starkware force-pushed the pr/Itay-Tsabary-Starkware/tsabary/cleanups/4c9d9914 branch from 8e64414 to 65d0250 Compare July 8, 2024 10:53
Copy link
Contributor

@uriel-starkware uriel-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:lgtm:

Reviewable status: 0 of 3 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware Itay-Tsabary-Starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewed 3 of 3 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)

@Itay-Tsabary-Starkware
Copy link
Contributor Author

✓ Commit merged in pull request #394

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.

3 participants