Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
4 Skipped Deployments
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 0745632726
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| { | ||
| "chain": "sui_mainnet", | ||
| "stateId": "0xd0db9c1e9212a98120384bf78d8b8c985d87b9ee6921dffcf9d1394062911573", | ||
| "wormholeStateId": "aeab97f96cf9877fee2883315d459552b2b921edc16d7ceac6eab944dd88919c", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prefix wormholeStateId with 0x
wormholeStateId is missing the 0x prefix here, unlike the existing Sui contract entries (e.g., SuiWormholeContracts.json). This field is used as-is in Sui Lazer governance paths (SuiChain.updateTrustedSigner / upgradeLazerContract), where it is passed to getStatePackageInfo and tx.object, so this mainnet contract record can fail when resolving or referencing the Wormhole state object.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess then the question is why stateId has 0x and this one doesn't have it :?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was some funny business with adding or not adding 0x to some API param at some point, but currently it's just being passed to Sui's getObject, which doesn't care about prefix. Should I change it for consistency?
Summary
Adds deployed mainnet contract info to contract manager.
How has this been tested?