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.

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

[Move] Part-6 Classes into Different Library - Neo.Extensions #3410

Open
wants to merge 50 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member

Description

Reorganized and move classes from neo library to neo.extensions library.

Fixed problems and warnings that occurred. Along with naming violations.

Change Log

  • Moved methods from Neo.IO.Helper class
  • Added BinaryReaderExtensions, BinaryWriterExtensions, MemoryReaderExtensions, SpanExtensions classes
  • Added more methods to StringExtensions, ByteExtensions MemoryExtensions
  • Added using statement
  • Fixed unit tests

Type of change

  • Optimization (the change is only an optimization)
  • Style (the change is only a code style for better maintenance or standard purpose)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

  • Unit Testing

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

@cschuchardt88 cschuchardt88 added Blocked This issue can't be worked at the moment Waiting for Review labels Jul 7, 2024
@cschuchardt88 cschuchardt88 added Blocker Issues that are blocking other issues. Check issues details to see what it is blocking. Waiting for Review and removed Blocked This issue can't be worked at the moment labels Sep 28, 2024
.github/workflows/docker.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Jim8y Jim8y requested a review from shargon October 14, 2024 13:35
/// </summary>
/// <param name="data">The compressed data.</param>
/// <param name="maxOutput">The maximum data size after decompression.</param>
/// <returns>The original data.</returns>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know that adding new methods will make it easier to do the work, and actually it wont cause any trouble, but please avoid doing so.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree, please don't add if the PR is so big and is not related with this

Copy link
Member

@shargon shargon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@superboyiii could you check if there are any storage change in both networks?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Blocker Issues that are blocking other issues. Check issues details to see what it is blocking. Waiting for Review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants