-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 991
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
Murisi/remove reverse conversions #4290
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
c5bc0a6
to
ba4d2c7
Compare
ba4d2c7
to
b9f4594
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4290 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 74.03% 74.16% +0.12%
==========================================
Files 345 345
Lines 110047 110510 +463
==========================================
+ Hits 81476 81961 +485
+ Misses 28571 28549 -22 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@@ -2076,13 +2035,12 @@ mod test_shielded_wallet { | |||
// to construct conversions properly, just like the protocol does, i.e. | |||
// with conversions for non-consecutive epochs | |||
|
|||
// Query the balance with conversions at epoch 4 | |||
// Query the balance with conversions at epoch 5 |
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.
Probably this test is not needed anymore since it's testing the functionality that this pr removes?
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.
Thanks, you're right. But maybe this test can just be repurposed since the specific checks that it does are still useful in the absence of inverse conversions...
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.
Right but I think for this test to make sense we should shield at epoch 4 instead of 5. Right now we shield at 5 and query at 5 so we just get back the same amount. We should instead shield at 4, query at epoch 4 expecting the same amount and then query at epoch 5 expecting the rewards
Describe your changes
An alternative to #4288 where the ability to choose the epoch to which amounts are exchanged to is simply removed. This functionality became redundant once pinned transactions were removed in #3142 . More generally, this functionality is only needed for properly implementing functionality like account statements and pinned transactions where the amounts that were received need to be printed out exactly as they were in the past without any influence from conversions in the current tree.
Checklist before merging
breaking::
labelsnamada-docs
reponamada-indexer
ornamada-masp-indexer
, a corresponding PR is opened in that repo