So good that we went with upper case contract names and the properties instead of the functions!
But it will breaks on Contributor, wouldn’t it? I think we should rename that contract next and align the module code to it. Will make the future much brighter!
So good that we went with upper case contract names and the properties instead of the functions!
But it will breaks on `Contributor`, wouldn’t it? I think we should rename that contract next and align the module code to it. Will make the future much brighter!
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
now using the library in add-proposal.js, too. And the CLI is smarter and allows calling functions on the contract and on the wrapper.
Some comments
Do you have a linter now?
Where does
contributorscome from?So good that we went with upper case contract names and the properties instead of the functions!
But it will breaks on
Contributor, wouldn’t it? I think we should rename that contract next and align the module code to it. Will make the future much brighter!@@ -30,2 +30,4 @@return;}let argumentInput = await promptly.prompt('Arguments (comma separated): ', { default: '' });let args = [];👀 nice!
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");Haha master of es6. I think you don’t need the if and the initial
argslet args = argumentInput.split(',')should return an empty array.nah, not yet. :(
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");oh yeah, true.
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");ah noo. it returns an array with an empty string, that was the reason for the if. or what am I missing?
@@ -29,0 +25,4 @@method = await promptly.prompt('Function: ');}if (!contractWrapper[method] && !contractWrapper.functions[method]) {yes, agree on renaming it! and maybe adding an alias for Contributor <=> Contributors
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");Ah ok.
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");But if input is already not an empty string, wouldn't it return an array with one argument string?
@@ -29,0 +25,4 @@method = await promptly.prompt('Function: ');}if (!contractWrapper[method] && !contractWrapper.functions[method]) {I opened #44 for the alias
@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");https://jsbin.com/qarikabane/edit?js,console
it would return
[""]but if no arguments are given I need[].@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");I was actually asking about the
triminside, but no idea why. It's for removing whitespace, so that's still needed.@@ -34,1 +44,4 @@func = contractWrapper.functions[method];}func.apply(contractWrapper, args).then((result) => {console.log("\nResult:");yep, trim() for potential whitespace as for example in
"first, second"mergeable? or is anything missing?