Muxed address support sketch for Soroban SDK. #1441
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This introduces the `MuxedAddress` type that maps to either `AddressObject` or `MuxedAddressObject`. In order to not 'leak' the muxed addresses everywhere (as they have pretty narrow use cases), introduce a separate token interface that supports muxed addresses for transfer (could also support e.g. transfer_from). This is basically token extension, but a bit clunkier due to the lack of overload support. The amount of copy-paste could be reduced though with some code generation (I'm not sure that's necessary though). Also only expose muxed addresses to generate clients when that's explicitly requested, as again users normally don't need to worry about them.
Comment on lines
-68
to
-71
| #[cfg(not(target_family = "wasm"))] | ||
| if !self.env.is_same_env(&other.env) { | ||
| return ScVal::from(self).cmp(&ScVal::from(other)); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are the comparison functions changing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's unrelated to the sketch, I just didn't want to refactor the SDK to support stellar/rs-soroban-env#1516.
Comment on lines
-20
to
33
| pub fn transfer(&self, from: Address, to: Address, amount: i128) { | ||
| pub fn transfer<AddressType: sealed::IsAddressType + IntoVal<Env, Val>>( | ||
| &self, | ||
| from: AddressType, | ||
| to: AddressType, | ||
| amount: i128, | ||
| ) { | ||
| let topics = (symbol_short!("transfer"), from, to); | ||
| self.env.events().publish(topics, amount); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like the muxed address is emitted in the topic, so it wouldn't be very easy for a consumer to filter only on the underlying address.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, the sketch was about the issue of 'passing the muxed addresses to the contracts' and I didn't want to spend much time on the events. I've just implemented the simplest option; with one more host fn we could also be emit id separately (the library interface won't change for the caller though).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This introduces the
MuxedAddresstype that maps to eitherAddressObjectorMuxedAddressObject.In order to not 'leak' the muxed addresses everywhere (as they have pretty narrow use cases), introduce a separate token interface that supports muxed addresses for transfer (could also support e.g. transfer_from). This is basically token extension, but a bit clunkier due to the lack of overload support. The amount of copy-paste could be reduced though with some code generation (I'm not sure that's necessary though). Also only expose muxed addresses to generate clients when that's explicitly requested, as again users normally don't need to worry about them.