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

Unintuitive naming on signTransaction() and signCotaNFTTx(). #29

Open
jordanmack opened this issue Jan 12, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Unintuitive naming on signTransaction() and signCotaNFTTx(). #29

jordanmack opened this issue Jan 12, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@jordanmack
Copy link
Contributor

In @joyid/ckb, the functions signTransaction() and signCotaNFTTx() have slightly different functionality than is indicated.

signTransaction(): Creates a transaction to send CKB and signs it without broadcasting.
signCotaNFTTx(): Creates a transaction to send a CoTA NFT and signs it without broadcasting.

At a glance, more fitting function names would be something like sendCkbTx() and sendCotaNftTx().

@duanyytop
Copy link
Member

duanyytop commented Feb 23, 2024

We hope Dapps will send the signed transaction by themselves, not the JoyID app and this is more general.

So I think the prefix sign makes more sense and maybe signTransferTx is better than signTransaction.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants