Mx 15792 esdt prefix updates and fixes #6466
Conversation
…-fixes' into MX-15792-esdt-prefix-updates-and-fixes
| type crossChainTokenChecker struct { | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func NewCrossChainTokenChecker() *crossChainTokenChecker { |
| return &crossChainTokenChecker{} | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // IsCrossChainOperation does nothing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // IsCrossChainOperation does nothing | |
| // IsCrossChainOperation returns false |
| return false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // IsCrossChainOperationAllowed does nothing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // IsCrossChainOperationAllowed does nothing | |
| // IsCrossChainOperationAllowed returns false nothing |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // IsCrossChainOperation does nothing | ||
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperation(tokenID []byte) bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperation(tokenID []byte) bool { | |
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperation(_ []byte) bool { |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // IsCrossChainOperationAllowed does nothing | ||
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperationAllowed(address []byte, tokenID []byte) bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperationAllowed(address []byte, tokenID []byte) bool { | |
| func (ctc *crossChainTokenChecker) IsCrossChainOperationAllowed(_ []byte, _ []byte) bool { |
| nftV2 := sovChainPrefix + "-NFTV2-a1b2c3" | ||
| nftV2Nonce := uint64(10) | ||
| token := sovChainPrefix + "-TKN-1q2w3e" | ||
|
|
||
| bridgedInTokens := make([]chainSim.ArgsDepositToken, 0) | ||
| bridgedInTokens = append(bridgedInTokens, chainSim.ArgsDepositToken{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why were these removed from these tests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NonFungible type is not accepted anymore
| @@ -38,7 +39,7 @@ func TestChainSimulator_ExecuteMintBurnBridgeOpForESDTTokensWithPrefixAndTransfe | |||
| BypassTxSignatureCheck: true, | |||
| TempDir: t.TempDir(), | |||
| PathToInitialConfig: defaultPathToInitialConfig, | |||
| NumOfShards: 1, | |||
| NumOfShards: 3, | |||
| Amount: big.NewInt(1), | ||
| Type: core.NonFungibleV2, | ||
| }) | ||
| //bridgedInTokens = append(bridgedInTokens, chainSim.ArgsDepositToken{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not ok.
We should not merge commented untested code !
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As the TODO says, the contract uses structs from the rust framework and we need to wait for rust framework to be updated to accept all new esdt types. I will create another PR with tests for create/burn for all esdt types but on different contract that is not using framework structs.
| checkTokenDataInAccount(t, cs, token, esdtSafeEncoded, big.NewInt(0)) | ||
| receiverToken.Amount = remainingTokenAmount | ||
|
|
||
| if remainingTokenAmount.Cmp(big.NewInt(0)) > 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why make this "same shard" transfer based on remaining amount?
You seem to always send tokens above to receiver, then in "same shard" you also send from receiver, so you should always have tokens in receiver
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- The
walletin shard 0 sends tokens toreceiverin shard 2 - The
receiverwill deposit (burn) in the bridge contract in shard 1 - The
receiverin shard 2 sends tokens toreceiver2in same shard
This check is to skip the NFT tokens because after deposit quantity is 0
| chainSim.TransferESDT(t, cs, sender.Bytes, receiver.Bytes, senderNonce, token.Identifier, amountToSend) | ||
| } else { | ||
| chainSim.TransferESDTNFT(t, cs, sender.Bytes, receiver.Bytes, senderNonce, token.Identifier, token.Nonce, amountToSend) | ||
| err := cs.GenerateBlocks(3) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why generate extra blocks here?
Because cross shard txs? And why it works for TransferESDT without generated blocks?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For NFT transfer, sender == receiver in arguments and actual receiver is in input data in tx. So the chain simulator verifies the status on the same shard and is successful in 1 block. Then I need to wait 3 more blocks so the actual receiver will receive the tokens because is in different shard.
Reasoning behind the pull request
Proposed changes
Testing procedure
Pre-requisites
Based on the Contributing Guidelines the PR author and the reviewers must check the following requirements are met:
featbranch created?featbranch merging, do all satellite projects have a proper tag insidego.mod?