[Question] curious why not leveraging IDL in the resolver

[khwbagm]

Hi qvecs, thanks for sharing the code! Very clean and element design and implementation. I'm still getting familiar with the code and one question pops out. (This might be a dumb question. Also, english is not my native language and I meant no offensive.)

I saw in the resolver, you are using hard coded byte range for extracting each parameters. I was imagining that you'd leverage IDL for doing such things. Do you mind sharing the thoughts that you decided not to go this way?

[synchronizing]

A few different reasons;

• IDLs are specific to programs built on top of Anchor. Pumpfun and Raydium are the only two that have IDLs- system programs do not.

• IDLs are bulky and I would need to introduce new code to dynamically load them. Not using them minimizes our external dependencies & simplifies the resolvers.

With that being said, however, I'm not opposed to introducing new resolvers that would leverage IDLs. I personally don't have that use case right now.