-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 679
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
PoX-4 unit testing #4698
PoX-4 unit testing #4698
Conversation
`delegate-stack-increase`
Initial test is validating the situation where a user switching pools requires one cycle of down time.
a9ae8c9
to
da1d046
Compare
da1d046
to
389ae6f
Compare
Why not using the pox contract from stacks lib? |
I was actually curious about that too. I think there was some reason related to coverage that @hugocaillard did that. I'll let him answer. |
Coverage reports are broken. How do we ensure that the two pox files are always in sync? Maybe we can copy it over? Or make it a requirement? |
Opened #4718 to update the comment on this function in the next iteration of PoX.
Final coverage numbers:
I believe that all of the remaining uncovered lines/branches are either unreachable or are from a weakness in Clarinet's coverage reporting. |
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.
LGTM 🙌
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.
LGTM!
The removal of package-lock.json causes `npm ci` to fail and it should not be removed by this PR any way.
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.
LGTM
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Add Clarity unit testing for the pox-4 contract.