-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 208
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 simple swap #1
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
warner
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2019
evaluate: accept options argument
warner
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2019
…s-1.4.2 Bump eslint-utils from 1.4.0 to 1.4.2
warner
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2019
Mark code in README as js, for syntax highlighting
dckc
referenced
this pull request
in dckc/agoric-sdk
Dec 5, 2019
dckc
referenced
this pull request
in dckc/agoric-sdk
Dec 5, 2019
…-test/js-yaml-3.13.1 Bump js-yaml from 3.13.0 to 3.13.1 in /integration-test
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2021
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 21, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 21, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
michaelfig
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
michaelfig
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 25, 2022
Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"?
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 25, 2022
- factor out registerNetworkProtocols - factor out makeChainBundler - add vatParameters arg - import types for vats - avoid casting result of buildZoe - turn bootMsg example comment into machine-checked type - default attMakerFor to non-bridge case rather than undefined - fix array arg to buildDistributor - factor out createLocalBundle - add vatPowers arg - refactor: unroll setupCommandDevice - feat: don't await vatAdminSvc I can't imagine any need for it to be local. - docs: prune refs to python provisioning service Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"? - docs: declare type of makeFeeCollector move function comment into JSDoc
dckc
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2022
- factor out registerNetworkProtocols - factor out makeChainBundler - add vatParameters arg - import types for vats - avoid casting result of buildZoe - turn bootMsg example comment into machine-checked type - default attMakerFor to non-bridge case rather than undefined - fix array arg to buildDistributor - factor out createLocalBundle - add vatPowers arg - refactor: unroll setupCommandDevice - feat: don't await vatAdminSvc I can't imagine any need for it to be local. - docs: prune refs to python provisioning service Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"? - docs: declare type of makeFeeCollector move function comment into JSDoc
michaelfig
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2022
- factor out registerNetworkProtocols - factor out makeChainBundler - add vatParameters arg - import types for vats - avoid casting result of buildZoe - turn bootMsg example comment into machine-checked type - default attMakerFor to non-bridge case rather than undefined - fix array arg to buildDistributor - factor out createLocalBundle - add vatPowers arg - refactor: unroll setupCommandDevice - feat: don't await vatAdminSvc I can't imagine any need for it to be local. - docs: prune refs to python provisioning service Is there anything left that's worth saying about "scenario #1"? - docs: declare type of makeFeeCollector move function comment into JSDoc
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This changes the template to use @katelynsills 's
simpleSwap
instead ofautomaticRefund
. It only changes thecontract/
directory, however: I don't know what changes are needed toapi/
orui/
to make the simple swap usable.. someone else should look at that before we land this.