Partial crowdfund support #51
Conversation
…ding full test suite
| @@ -142,31 +169,13 @@ contract Crowdloan is Initializable, ICrowdloan, ReentrancyGuard { | |||
| ); | |||
|
|
|||
| if (termsContract.getLoanStatus() < TermsContractLib.LoanStatus.REPAYMENT_CYCLE) { | |||
| termsContract.startLoan(); | |||
| termsContract.startRepaymentCycle(totalCrowdfunded); // TODO(Dan): change this to be the amount actually raised | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be
termsContract.startRepaymentCycle(_getPrincipalToken().balanceOf(address(this))),
which simply takes the balance at this point in time of the crowdloan contract.
This also removes the need to track totalCrowdfunded within the fund and refund functions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@adibas03 Ah yes I thought about that. That approach might create a few problems:
-
Someone does a native ERC20 transfer to the smart contract, such that
_getPrincipalToken().balanceOf(address(this))is > thanprincipalRequested -
In TermsContract, we have a
requirethat checks thatprincipalDisbursedis not more thanprincipalRequested -
If that happens, the funds are locked and can't be withdrawn
I think I can resolve it by removing totalCrowdfunded, and instead just passing in the smaller of balanceOf(address(this)) and principalRequested into the startRepaymentCycle function
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we are to use a ceiling, it means we have to implement a cap for the withdrawal function as well, which makes withdrawing in bits more annoying, and would be better we have a simple withdraw function that takes the lesser of principalRequested and balanceOf(address(this)) and transfers the said amount, after which it locks withdrawal
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah just saw your message in the other post - makes sense. I'll implement the donations functionality today
|
@onggunhao Is this PR ready? |
|
moved to #54 |
crowdLoan