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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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 dispatcher components #66
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add dispatcher components #66
Changes from 1 commit
69ec4b2
df355ae
39c772a
50862c3
e33002f
4eb3500
704ffa3
2d9c215
914da35
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
The file name is awkward. I think it's good not to just pile all the code into a single util file, but having awkwardly named Utils.sol files next to a generic Utils.sol is not the answer. The answer that scales and is clean is to create a utils subdirectory and have the individual files live in there and then expose their totality through a Utils.sol in the root directory.
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.
Redundant comment.
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.
Was there a deliberate choice to short-circuit zero value native token transfers but allow them for ERC20s? Do we rely anywhere on an ERC20 Transfer event even for zero value transfers?
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.
unconventional order comparison. Should be
role == Role.None
to match expectation.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.
unconventional order comparison. Should be
msg.sender != state.owner
to be consistent and match convention.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.
redundant comment.
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.
does not adhere to 100 char max line length
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.
inconsistent use of
uint256
anduint
. In the original codeuint
is used for essentially unbounded uint values, akin tosize_t
whileuint256
puts an emphasis on the importance of the datatype (like in a wire format, or for a value that is defined to be 256 bit).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.
redundant comment.
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.
inconsistent use of
uint256
anduint
.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.
Inconsistent order comparison.
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.
Redundant comment.