BUIDL GSM Integration #421
Conversation
|
…enforce no remaining balance in converter
test: remaining gho balance
refactor: rename buyAsset fail mock contracts, re-order methods test: separate check in buyAsset for redeemed asset
feat: skeleton for sellAssetWithSig refactor: rename mock contract
…llAssetWithSig test
test: add assertions for testSellAssetWithSig
test: clean up referenced amounts in tests
| IGhoToken(GHO_TOKEN).mint(address(this), grossAmount); | ||
| IGhoToken(GHO_TOKEN).transfer(receiver, ghoBought); | ||
| // TRIGGER ERROR: invalid transfer of GHO amount to GSM Converter (msg.sender) | ||
| IGhoToken(GHO_TOKEN).transfer(msg.sender, 1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly here, you can just have this one broken function that you call in your test. Can't use vm.mockCall() because it's actually transferring tokens in this case.
I still need to look into it, but you could perhaps just fuzz test these functions to test if calculations would fail instead of using this mock pattern, because it's effectively testing a contract out of scope of our repo, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you can just have this one broken function that you call in your test
This one I think was harder to simulate bc it needed to happen within the flow of the converter, rather than within the test.
effectively testing a contract out of scope of our repo, no
I don't think it is out of scope of the repo, but perhaps out of scope of the converter because it is the GSM implementation. Do you think from the POV of the converter I can assume that the GSM will function properly and leave the require statement coverage uncovered that checks the correct amount of tokens are returned from GSM?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you can leave this mock in here, but can't you reduce the code? I think you probably left in some functions that are unused in the tests involving this mock
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes I think so, let me work on that
closes #420