feat(parsed_transaction_history): add transaction pagination #14
Conversation
0xIchigo
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow, thank you for your contribution! That was a fast turnaround, from raising the issue in Discord to making a PR! I've left a few minor comments, but this is a solid PR overall!
Can you also please run the cargo fmt command before you commit your new changes? That way everything is formatted properly and all the checks for the build pass
src/enhanced_transactions.rs
Outdated
| @@ -31,14 +31,20 @@ impl Helius { | |||
| /// | |||
| /// # Arguments | |||
| /// * `address` - An address for which a given parsed transaction history will be retrieved | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We'll need to update this to reflect the new request type as the address argument will no longer be valid
There was a problem hiding this comment.
parse_transactions follows this format as well (showing the parameters of the type) which is why I framed it that way. Would you like me to update that one as welll?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As in, I put address and before instead of `ParsedTransactionHistoryRequest', like parse_transactions does above
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, yeah, that's an oversight on my end — parse_transactions should have ParseTransactionsRequest as its argument and the description should stay the same
| @@ -210,6 +210,12 @@ pub struct ParseTransactionsRequest { | |||
| pub transactions: Vec<String>, | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Debug)] | |||
| pub struct ParseTransactionHistoryRequest { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer if we renamed it to ParsedTransactionHistoryRequest so it follows the same name as its function with request added at the end
Added ability paginate the results of the request in the transaction history, by doing the following:
addressString and an OptionbeforeStringparsed_transaction_historyto input the new type, and update the API call ifbeforeexists. Updated documentation above it.I've never contributed to an open-source project, so please forgive me if this is the wrong process for suggesting edits or updates to the module.
I looked through the code to adhere to similar structures that y'all used in other aspects, but either way this should be a complete fix here or a good start to this implementation.
Any feedback or comments please let me know. Otherwise it should be good to go.
Cheers,
rhh