Closed benisgold closed 1 month ago
@walmat technically it isn't needed. i initially attempted type expansion, but it got messy pretty quickly. it was also difficult to follow my own code bc of all the numerous type assertions currently in raps. i figured i would try and clean things up
also for context the claimable rap types will be somewhat more complicated than what you see now because there will be the unlock/crosschain swap actions added onto this rap as well in future PRs
@walmat if you want more context about my previous comment see my recent commit. i tested out (again) trying to make raps v1 compatible with claimables, and you can see how messy it gets with types. and this is just the tip of the iceberg, it gets worse. it's a slippery slope
@walmat if you want more context about my previous comment see my recent commit. i tested out (again) trying to make raps v1 compatible with claimables, and you can see how messy it gets with types. and this is just the tip of the iceberg, it gets worse. it's a slippery slope
i'll take a look
This pull request was deployed and Sentry observed the following issues:
_callSuper(src/logger/index)
View IssueDid you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎
Fixes APP-####
What changed (plus any additional context for devs)
i recreated raps for the following reasons
Screen recordings / screenshots
What to test
nothing to test bc this isn't in use