Wallet UI services #5949
Wallet UI services #5949
Conversation
| try { | ||
| await E(offer.actions).accept(); | ||
| } catch (e) { | ||
| setPendingOffers({ offerId: id, isPending: false }); | ||
| console.error('Failed to accept offer', e); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
with this try, returned promise will now resolve even if accept fails. I don't know if anything is actually paying attention to the result (there's no return type) but I think it would be safer to keep this function sync and return the failed promise.
| try { | |
| await E(offer.actions).accept(); | |
| } catch (e) { | |
| setPendingOffers({ offerId: id, isPending: false }); | |
| console.error('Failed to accept offer', e); | |
| } | |
| return E(offer.actions).accept().catch(e => { | |
| setPendingOffers({ offerId: id, isPending: false }); | |
| console.error('Failed to accept offer', e); | |
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's better, done thanks
| give = proposalTemplate.give ?? {}; | ||
| want = proposalTemplate.want ?? {}; | ||
| args = proposalTemplate.arguments; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is it intended that ! proposalForDisplay && ! proposalTemplate result in give = {} etc? Consider including an explanation.
| } | |
| } else { | |
| // leave default values | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, added an explanation
| @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ | |||
| import { makeNotifierKit } from '@agoric/notifier'; | |||
|
|
|||
| export const getIssuerService = signSpendAction => { | |||
|
|
||
| export const getIssuerService = signSpendAction => { | ||
| const suggestions = new Map(); | ||
| const { notifier, updater } = makeNotifierKit(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not worth changing right now but for the future consider makePublishKit
samsiegart
force-pushed
the
wallet-ui-services
branch
2 times, most recently
from
6607b6f
to
a1e470b
Compare
| /** @type {IdTable<number, Payment>} */ | ||
| /** @type {IdTable<number, unknown>} */ |
| /** @type {IdTable<number, PurseActions>} */ | ||
| /** @type {IdTable<number, Purse>} */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, I was probably getting ahead of myself with PurseActions.
| @@ -1205,7 +1205,7 @@ test('lib-wallet performAction suggestIssuer', async t => { | |||
| type: 'suggestIssuer', | |||
| data: { petname: 'bucksIssuer', boardId: bucksIssuerBoardId }, | |||
| }); | |||
| const done = await wallet.performAction({ action }); | |||
| const done = await wallet.performAction({ spendAction: action }); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestIssuer is a spendAction? I suppose that's correct but just a sort of de-optimization.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I haven't tried getting a non-spend action end-to-end working, I assumed that was still needing design but perhaps this can be the first one we try with. We can revisit.
| @@ -241,17 +241,19 @@ const defaultMakePresence = iface => { | |||
| */ | |||
| export const makeImportContext = (makePresence = defaultMakePresence) => { | |||
| const walletObjects = { | |||
| /** @type {IdTable<number, PurseActions>} */ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ouch... why did we have to take that out? Can we make it IdTable<number, unknown>? or even IdTable<number, *>? Using * (aka any) should include a justification comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added it back with unknown
samsiegart
force-pushed
the
wallet-ui-services
branch
from
a1d1934
to
4938df1
Compare
refs: #5354