-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 52
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
[SDKv2] Update the Faucet class and fix param naming #10
Conversation
Current dependencies on/for this PR: This comment was auto-generated by Graphite. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
run pnpm fmt && pnpm lint
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's not add anything without a test now that we have CI working
73d82cd
to
b02f106
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we add tests for faucet query?
fund an account and make sure this account exist on chain
src/internal/faucet.ts
Outdated
amount: number; | ||
timeoutSecs?: number; | ||
}): Promise<Array<string>> { | ||
const { aptosConfig, accountAddress, amount } = args; | ||
const timeoutSecs = args.timeoutSecs ?? DEFAULT_TXN_TIMEOUT_SEC; | ||
const { data } = await postAptosFaucet<any, Array<string>>({ | ||
aptosConfig, | ||
body: null, | ||
path: "mint", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's land Greg's stuff first? It switches us to fund
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Updated to use fund
b02f106
to
d19eaf5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
const testAccount = Account.generate({ scheme: SigningScheme.Ed25519 }); | ||
|
||
// Fund the account | ||
await aptos.fundAccount({ accountAddress: testAccount.accountAddress.toString(), amount: 10_000_000 }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, this I see is why you don't want to pass the string, and instead the account address, we'll have to review this whole input strategy afterwards
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep. Including the args as input param on some places, we can revisit after Alpha :)
Description
accountAddress
toaddress
Test Plan
pnpm test
Related Links