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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Start indexing at 1 for integer fields & enums #169

Closed
cwgoes opened this issue Aug 4, 2019 · 1 comment · Fixed by #201
Closed

Start indexing at 1 for integer fields & enums #169

cwgoes opened this issue Aug 4, 2019 · 1 comment · Fixed by #201
Assignees
@cwgoes
Labels
from-review Feedback / alterations from specification review.
Milestone
IBC 1.0.0-rc3

Comments

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Aug 4, 2019

Suggested by Agoric; this makes accidental mistakes by implementers harder to make.

Applies to:

  • nextSequenceSend / nextSequenceRecv
  • Enums
  • Other integer fields that are incrementing counters
@cwgoes cwgoes added the from-review Feedback / alterations from specification review. label Aug 4, 2019
@cwgoes cwgoes added this to the IBC 1.0.0-rc1 milestone Aug 4, 2019
@cwgoes cwgoes self-assigned this Aug 4, 2019
@mossid
Copy link

mossid commented Aug 4, 2019 •
edited
Loading

The spec may explicitly say whether we want to treat zero values and non-existing values equally or differently.

Also it might be beneficial to apply this for the identifiers too(empty string is forbidden in any case)

@cwgoes cwgoes mentioned this issue Aug 17, 2019
Merged
@cwgoes cwgoes mentioned this issue Aug 17, 2019
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@cwgoes cwgoes

Labels
from-review Feedback / alterations from specification review.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
IBC 1.0.0-rc3
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Start indexing at 1 for sequences & enums cosmos/ibc
2 participants
@mossid @cwgoes