-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add assertions to generic transfer and update docs #166
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for the delay on this review. Left one non-blocking comment
if addressString.length == 18 { | ||
addressString = addressString.slice(from: 2, upTo: 18) | ||
} | ||
let typeString: String = "A.".concat(addressString).concat(".").concat(contractName).concat(".Vault") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This covers all existing Vault
implementations but wouldn't cover multi-vault FT contracts. We should probably note that in the docs and add a generic_transfer_with_identifier
as was suggested for bridge transactions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
good point! I created an issue here:#168
1c38ad1
to
b283fe6
Compare
Closes: #162
Description
generic_transfer_with_address
to make sure the vault is the correct typeMaliciousToken
to test the transaction.MaliciousToken
is the same asExampleToken
, but returns theExampleToken
paths in theFTVaultData
view instead of its own paths.FungibleToken
I can't think of any other assertions to put in the transactions, but I am open to suggestions
For contributor use:
master
branchFiles changed
in the Github PR explorer