Confusing Error Reproduction

[apopiak]

Note: This PR is only to reproduce the error for #6379

Add duplicate dispatchable to trigger confusing error:

error: Implicit conversion to privileged function has been removed. First parameter of dispatch should be marked `origin`. For root-matching dispatch, also add `ensure_root(origin)?`.
   --> pallets/template/src/lib.rs:63:1
    |
63  | / decl_module! {
64  | |     /// The module declaration.
65  | |     pub struct Module<T: Trait> for enum Call where origin: T::Origin {
66  | |         // Initializing errors
...   |
116 | |     }
117 | | }
    | |_^
    |
    = note: this error originates in a macro (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)

[parity-cla-bot]

It looks like @apopiak signed our Contributor License Agreement. 👍

Many thanks,

Parity Technologies CLA Bot

[shawntabrizi]

@apopiak is this specific to on_intialize or can you repro this for other such functions?

In the case of on_initialize this is a macro matching issue.

The first on_initialize() function is captured using our macro and is expected. The next one goes through our normal dispatch function logic, which does not allow any dispatchable that does not contain origin as the first parameter.

I would guess this problem only occurs with "reserved functions" like on_initialize, on_finalize, on_runtime_upgrade, etc...

Not a macro god, so idk the fix. :P

[apopiak]

I originally triggered it with on_runtime_upgrade, so I guess it's likely that it's only the "reserved functions"

[shawntabrizi]

Yeah. So the root of the issue is as I described. We expect one instance of on_runtime_upgrade()

This instance is handled special in our macro parsing logic.

After the first instance, the function is treated like any arbitrary function, so the name is not considered for the parsing. At this point we only consider the function parameters, and we see that this dispatchable function is missing origin, so we complain.

Its a valid issue, hopefully someone knows a fix.

[apopiak]

Verified that this is not reproducible via duplicating a "regular dispatchable", so it's an issue with the "reserved functions".

[bkchr]

Will be fixed by: #6384