This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.
Expose storage_prefix logic, and remove duplicate code
#9621
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
shawntabrizi
added
B0-silent
KiChjang
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2021
gui1117
reviewed
Aug 25, 2021
gui1117
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2021
Co-authored-by: Guillaume Thiolliere <[email protected]>
|
bot merge |
|
Waiting for commit status. |
ghost
merged commit
Wizdave97
pushed a commit
to Wizdave97/substrate
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 25, 2021
…9621) * expose storage prefix generation, remove duplicate code * remove more duplicate code * clean up import * fix io test * remove slicing * Update frame/support/src/storage/mod.rs Co-authored-by: Guillaume Thiolliere <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Guillaume Thiolliere <[email protected]> fix: revert unneccessary changes
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 exposes the logic behind generating a
storage_prefix, and also removes lots of duplicated code where this function can be used instead.