Skip to content

test: increase CU limit for failing tests#88

Merged
IaroslavMazur merged 1 commit intoiaro/dependenciesfrom
iaro/tests
Apr 30, 2025
Merged

test: increase CU limit for failing tests#88
IaroslavMazur merged 1 commit intoiaro/dependenciesfrom
iaro/tests

Conversation

@IaroslavMazur
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Depends on #87.

refactor: change verification order at Stream Creation (motivation: previously, passing an endTime < startTime resulted in the CliffTimeNotLessThanEndTime error being returned)

chore: update bun dependencies

refactor: change verification order at Stream Creation
(motivation: previously, passing an endTime < startTime resulted in
the CliffTimeNotLessThanEndTime error being returned)

chore: update bun dependencies
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@andreivladbrg andreivladbrg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, just one comment

}

// Check: the start time is strictly less than the end time.
if start_time >= end_time {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the motivation for placing this check after the cliff one in the EVM contract is to keep them in chronological order (assuming that the invariant is respected: start > cliff > end)
i don't have a strong preference here, but i'd say to sync them

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem with the current approach is that when the timestamps are endTime < startTime < cliffTime, instead of the logical StartTimeNotLessThanEndTime error, the CliffTimeNotLessThanEndTime error is being thrown. The latter makes the function caller think that it's the relative position of endTime and cliffTime (and not endTime and startTime) that is to be fixed 🤔

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

latter makes the function caller think that it's the relative position of endTime and cliffTime (and not endTime and startTime) that is to be fixed

i don't think there is a "logical" one here - they both need to be fixed not only start. IMO there is no winning candidate here

we can leave like this

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, we can get back to this discussion in the future, if we find strong(-er) arguments for one order (of checks) or the other.

Merging.

@IaroslavMazur IaroslavMazur merged commit 6baee82 into iaro/dependencies Apr 30, 2025
andreivladbrg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 2, 2025
chore: update Anchor version

chore: remove the bytemuck dependency hotfix
chore: update other dependencies

test: increase CU limit for failing tests (#88)

refactor: change verification order at Stream Creation
(motivation: previously, passing an endTime < startTime resulted in
the CliffTimeNotLessThanEndTime error being returned)

chore: update bun dependencies
@IaroslavMazur IaroslavMazur deleted the iaro/tests branch May 3, 2025 08:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants