Include signInFeature in the features for SolanaWalletAdapterWallet
#46
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
`SolanaWalletAdapterWallet` was missing `signInFeature`, so anything wrapped it in would be missing the `signIn` method
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is sequenced after wallet-standard/wallet-standard#101
SolanaWalletAdapterWalletwas missingsignInFeature, so anything wrapped it in would be missing thesignInmethod.Since the Standard Wallet Adapter will be updating the account upon successful SIWS (here), it's possible that the
#accountin the StandardWalletAdapter is different from the #account inSolanaWalletAdapterWallet. This then causes issues when there's an equality check of the accounts when theSolanaWalletAdapterWalletsets it to be something custom here. Hence, updating the equality checks to use the deep equality checks from wallet-standard/wallet-standard#101, instead of reference equality checks