Conversation
dijanin-brat
requested review from
bmzig,
dohaki,
mrice32,
nicholaspai and
pxrl
as code owners
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4e84878213
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| method: "", | ||
| args: [calldata], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Setting gasless deposits to always use method: "" forces the raw-transaction path in TransactionClient, which calls getGasPrice with unsignedTx omitted (sendRawTxn ? undefined : ... in src/clients/TransactionClient.ts). getGasPrice explicitly notes that Linea estimation requires an unsigned transaction (src/utils/TransactionUtils.ts), so Linea-origin gasless deposits can now fail during gas estimation/submission even when they previously worked without integratorId. Please keep a populated transaction available for fee estimation when appending the swap marker.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@dijanin-brat Just as a thought experiment, do you think it could work if we added a field "tag" to the AugmentedTransaction type, such that we ultimately passed that tag down to the point where we call _runTransaction(), where we'd supply it as one of its arguments?
This feature is admittedly something that we may not apply widely, but it feels like something that should be applied at the lowest level of encapsulation. _runTransaction() feels like it could be a good fit, though not necessarily the only option.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it really make sense to be as deep as it can. I am fully for this! I will prepare a new PR for that and close this one
2 participants
No description provided.