9211 lookup denom #9983
Merged
9211 lookup denom #9983
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
Deploying agoric-sdk with
|
| Latest commit: |
4cac5cc
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://ade6fe15.agoric-sdk.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://9211-lookup-denom.agoric-sdk.pages.dev |
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
from
d89e8dc to
5aa48dc
Compare
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b578e55 to
25b46fe
Compare
0xpatrickdev
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2024
|
trying an experiment to co-assign this PR to myself to get it to show up in a tracking thing |
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
from
80a9cdd to
73ef8f9
Compare
turadg
added
automerge:rebase
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
from
73ef8f9 to
1425086
Compare
dckc
reviewed
Aug 29, 2024
| @@ -94,6 +94,20 @@ export interface Chain<CI extends ChainInfo> { | |||
| // TODO provide a way to get the local denom/brand/whatever for this chain | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| export interface BrandInfo< | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A 1-line description seems worthwhile. I'm struggling a little bit to come up with one... but it seems a little odd to call this BrandInfo when the brand property is optional. Maybe something like AssetTrackingInfo or AssetInfo or AssetCosswalk.
asset is what the chain registry calls a similar structure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
cc @mitdralla @dtribble re change to orchestration-api.ts
Comment on lines
120
to
134
| ) => { | ||
| /** The well-known Brand on Agoric for the direct asset */ | ||
| brand?: Brand; | ||
| /** The Chain at which the argument `denom` exists (where the asset is currently held) */ | ||
| chain: Chain<KnownChains[HoldingChain]>; | ||
| /** The Chain that is the issuer of the underlying asset */ | ||
| base: Chain<KnownChains[IssuingChain]>; | ||
| /** the Denom for the underlying asset on its issuer chain */ | ||
| baseDenom: Denom; | ||
| }; | ||
| ) => BrandInfo<HoldingChain, IssuingChain>; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👏 this refactor addresses one case of...
(Unfortunately the symptoms persist for other methods such as getChain.)
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
3 times, most recently
from
093b875 to
18462fd
Compare
0xpatrickdev
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
from
18462fd to
ae17a39
Compare
turadg
force-pushed
the
9211-lookup-denom
branch
from
ae17a39 to
4cac5cc
Compare
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.
closes: #9211
Description
Uses ChainHub for lookup of denoms and brands (from the other).
Adds some coercion utilities to get the desired shape within the exos and contract, using a ChainHub.
Security Considerations
Contracts control their ChainHub and can specify any mapping of brand to denom.
Scaling Considerations
If contracts import the whole Known Chains module, that will increase bundle size. I think this will be unlikely in production. We'll have on-chain lookup by then.
Documentation Considerations
not yet
Testing Considerations
existing coverage
Upgrade Considerations
None of this is deployed yet