Reverse Splitter service #49
Conversation
Cargo.toml
Outdated
| valence-splitter-service = { path = "contracts/services/splitter", features = ["library"] } | ||
| valence-test-dynamic-ratio = { path = "contracts/testing/test-dynamic-ratio", features = ["library"] } | ||
| valence-test-service = { path = "contracts/testing/test-service", features = ["library"] } |
| name = "valence-reverse-splitter-service" | ||
| authors = { workspace = true } | ||
| edition = { workspace = true } |
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // // Prepare transfer messages for each denom |
| let res: DynamicRatioResponse = querier.query_wasm_smart( | ||
| contract_addr, | ||
| &DynamicRatioQueryMsg::DynamicRatio { | ||
| denoms: vec![denom_name.clone()], | ||
| params: params.to_string(), | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Regarding querying a dynamic ration, we would probably need a wrapper of our own that will support this query because 99% other contracts wont.
Just something to note somewhere so we won't forgot.
| pub fn with_factor(mut self, factor: u64) -> Self { | ||
| self.factor = Some(factor); | ||
| self | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The rest of the helper "with_" function are creating a new struct, I would suggest calling this as "set_factor" instead of with to make it clear.
| if splits | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .any(|s| !matches!(s.amount, UncheckedSplitAmount::FixedAmount(..))) | ||
| && splits.iter().any(|s| { | ||
| matches!(s.amount, UncheckedSplitAmount::FixedAmount(..)) && s.denom != *base_denom | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We already doing a loop above, we can have a flag set to true at the above loop if any !UncheckedSplitAmount::FixedAmount(..), instead of doing another loop here.
| cw20 = { workspace = true } | ||
| cw20-base = { workspace = true } | ||
| sha2 = { workspace = true } | ||
| valence-account-utils = { workspace = true } | ||
| valence-service-utils = { workspace = true, features = ["testing"] } | ||
| valence-test-dynamic-ratio = { workspace = true } |
| // Instantiate Splitter contract | ||
| suite.splitter_init(&cfg); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| #[test] | ||
| #[should_panic( | ||
| expected = "Configuration error: Duplicate split 'Native(\"untrn\")|AccountAddr(\"cosmwasm1ea6n0jqm0hj663khx7a5xklsmjgrazjp9vjeewejn84sanr0wgxq2p70xl\")' in split config." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed this line because I renamed an enum variant from AccountAddr to Addr,
Would be great if we can avoid those should_panic when we need to include some parsing of enums or alike.
| #[getset(get)] | ||
| inner: ServiceTestSuiteBase, | ||
| #[getset(get)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the purpose of getset(get) again? you are building the get functions below anyways
| ); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // // Native & CW20 token amount splits |
Implemented:
Todo: