Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: fce446c The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
commit: |
| const keyAuthorization = rpc.keyAuthorization | ||
| ? (() => { | ||
| const keyAuthorization = { | ||
| ...rpc.keyAuthorization, | ||
| // FIXME(ox): chainId not serialized in nested object | ||
| chainId: | ||
| rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId === '0x' || | ||
| rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId === '0x0' | ||
| ? 0 | ||
| : parseInt(rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId || '0x0', 16), | ||
| } | ||
| // FIXME(ox): expects `preHash` not `prehash` | ||
| if ( | ||
| keyAuthorization.signature && | ||
| keyAuthorization.signature.type === 'p256' && | ||
| 'prehash' in keyAuthorization.signature | ||
| ) { | ||
| const { prehash, ...rest } = keyAuthorization.signature | ||
| keyAuthorization.signature = { | ||
| ...rest, | ||
| // @ts-expect-error | ||
| preHash: prehash, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return keyAuthorization | ||
| })() | ||
| : undefined |
…/update-devnet-url
| ? 0 | ||
| : parseInt(rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId || '0x0', 16), | ||
| } | ||
| // FIXME(ox): expects `preHash` not `prehash` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lol well tests only pass with this probably because it gets omitted then 😓
There was a problem hiding this comment.
spec says preHash and tempo codebase uses pre_hash (which maps to camelized preHash, not lowercase prehash, assuming the same behavior as other fields)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All good, I read it as "ox expects preHash", not "rpc expects preHash" :P
| chainId: | ||
| rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId === '0x' || | ||
| rpc.keyAuthorization.chainId === '0x0' | ||
| ? 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The RPC doesn’t serialize chain ids?
| : undefined | ||
| const keyAuthorization = rpc.keyAuthorization | ||
| ? (() => { | ||
| const keyAuthorization = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don’t think we need to coerce this at all as TransactionRequest.toRpc already handles key auths. My question is that does the RPC expect a different format for chain ids and prehash naming? Guess we can update the prehash naming in Ox though
|
Just updated Ox for the |
b3409d2 to
fce446c
Compare
we made recent changes in the gas schedule for access keys, and therefore this test fails
this PR adds 2 new fields for gas estimate
running tests tempo e2e tests locally works