Skip to content
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

[ICS23] add conversion checks for ProofSpec, LeafOp, and InnerSpec structs #1108

Closed
Farhad-Shabani opened this issue Feb 29, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1160
Closed

[ICS23] add conversion checks for ProofSpec, LeafOp, and InnerSpec structs #1108

Farhad-Shabani opened this issue Feb 29, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1160
Labels
A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers O: reliability Objective: cause to improve trustworthiness and consistent performing
Milestone

Comments

@Farhad-Shabani
Copy link
Member

Farhad-Shabani commented Feb 29, 2024

Description

Current struct definitions for ProofSpec, LeafOp, InnerSpec lack essential conversion checks between their proto and domain types. This allows e.g. unchecked negative values for i32 fields.

Proposal

Define mirror domain types and utilize the TryFrom trait for robust conversion checks, ensuring type safety

@Farhad-Shabani Farhad-Shabani added A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers O: reliability Objective: cause to improve trustworthiness and consistent performing labels Feb 29, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to 📥 To Do in ibc-rs Feb 29, 2024
@tuantran1702
Copy link
Contributor

@Farhad-Shabani Hi, could I work on this issue?

@Farhad-Shabani
Copy link
Member Author

Hey @tropicaldog, thanks for being up for contributing! Sure, go ahead!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A: good-first-issue Admin: good for newcomers O: reliability Objective: cause to improve trustworthiness and consistent performing
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants