Skip to content
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

refactor: stableswap inverse tests to be consistent with the stableswap pool #1470

Closed
p0mvn opened this issue May 11, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed

Comments

@p0mvn
Copy link
Member

p0mvn commented May 11, 2022

Description TBD

As per discussion, we should change the test structs to be more aligned with the stableswap pools. Stableswap pools do not have weights but they do have scaling factors.

Therefore, we should remove weights from the tests and instead add scaling factors into the set up

Additionally, we might want to consider using stableswap denoms in tests to be aligned with the abstraction: #1456 (comment)

Acceptance Criteria

  • Test_StableSwap_CalculateAmountOutAndIn_InverseRelationship testcase struct does not have weights
  • scaling factors are added and configured correctly instead
  • denoms are changed to stableswap denoms ("uosmo" -> "ust")
  • tests continue to pass
@stackman27
Copy link
Contributor

I can work on this!

@p0mvn
Copy link
Member Author

p0mvn commented May 18, 2022

Hi @stackman27 . Thank you.

Please note that this is blocked by #1456. It doesn't prevent you from starting the work on another branch, just something to keep in mind

@stackman27
Copy link
Contributor

Yup, i'll pull the work from #1456 and work on top of it

@stackman27
Copy link
Contributor

stackman27 commented May 19, 2022

Hi @p0mvn do you think i need #1459 to complete this PR because I believe i need []stableswap.PoolAsset{...} in stableswap_pool.pb.go to test out scaling factors.

Also is there anywhere i can read up on scaling factors? I am a lil confused with how they impact the the stableswap pools.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants