refactor(x/protocolpool): Improve claiming funds logic #20154
Conversation
WalkthroughWalkthroughThe recent updates focus on enhancing the budget management logic throughout the codebase. Changes involve transitioning from using Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
…ita/fix-protocolpool
…ita/fix-protocolpool
…ita/fix-protocolpool
…ita/fix-protocolpool
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (1)
x/protocolpool/keeper/msg_server_test.go (1)
173-173: ThestartTimevariable is redeclared here, which might lead to confusion. Consider renaming it to avoid shadowing the outerstartTime.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- x/protocolpool/keeper/genesis.go (2 hunks)
- x/protocolpool/keeper/msg_server_test.go (8 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- x/protocolpool/keeper/genesis.go
- x/protocolpool/keeper/msg_server_test.go
…PerTranche` to simplify things (#20283)
…ita/fix-protocolpool
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (3)
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/query.pulsar.go (24 hunks)
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/tx.pulsar.go (17 hunks)
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/types.pulsar.go (22 hunks)
Files not summarized due to errors (3)
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/query.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/tx.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
- api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/types.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (3)
api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/types.pulsar.go (1)
Pattern
**/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/query.pulsar.go (1)
Pattern
**/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/tx.pulsar.go (1)
Pattern
**/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.
Additional comments not posted (40)
api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/types.pulsar.go (17)
24-24: Addition offd_Budget_last_claimed_atfield descriptor.This change aligns with the PR's objective to replace
start_timewithlast_claimed_at.
25-25: Addition offd_Budget_tranches_leftfield descriptor.This change supports the simplification of state management by focusing on the
tranches_leftfield.
26-26: Addition offd_Budget_budget_per_tranchefield descriptor.This supports the standardization of the budget per tranche, enhancing predictability and consistency in fund distribution.
118-120: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theRangemethod.This ensures that the new
last_claimed_atfield is correctly processed during message reflection.
130-134: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theRangemethod.This ensures that the new
budget_per_tranchefield is correctly processed during message reflection.
161-162: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theHasmethod.This ensures that the presence of the
last_claimed_atfield is correctly reported.
165-166: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theHasmethod.This ensures that the presence of the
budget_per_tranchefield is correctly reported.
189-190: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theClearmethod.This ensures that the
last_claimed_atfield can be correctly cleared.
193-194: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theClearmethod.This ensures that the
budget_per_tranchefield can be correctly cleared.
219-220: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theGetmethod.This ensures that the
last_claimed_atfield can be correctly retrieved.
225-227: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theGetmethod.This ensures that the
budget_per_tranchefield can be correctly retrieved.
255-256: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theSetmethod.This ensures that the
last_claimed_atfield can be correctly set.
259-260: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theSetmethod.This ensures that the
budget_per_tranchefield can be correctly set.
288-292: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theMutablemethod.This ensures that a mutable reference to the
last_claimed_atfield can be obtained.
293-297: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theMutablemethod.This ensures that a mutable reference to the
budget_per_tranchefield can be obtained.
325-325: Proper handling oflast_claimed_atin theNewFieldmethod.This ensures that a new instance of the
last_claimed_atfield can be created.
330-332: Proper handling ofbudget_per_tranchein theNewFieldmethod.This ensures that a new instance of the
budget_per_tranchefield can be created.api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/query.pulsar.go (7)
Line range hint
1-1: Ensure the file has the correct package declaration and imports.
2136-2136: Ensure theclaimed_amountfield inQueryUnclaimedBudgetResponseis correctly documented and matches the protobuf definition.
2138-2138: Ensure theunclaimed_amountfield inQueryUnclaimedBudgetResponseis correctly documented and matches the protobuf definition.
2141-2141: Ensure thenext_claim_fromfield inQueryUnclaimedBudgetResponseis correctly documented and matches the protobuf definition.
2143-2143: Ensure theperiodfield inQueryUnclaimedBudgetResponseis correctly documented and matches the protobuf definition.
2145-2145: Ensure thetranches_leftfield inQueryUnclaimedBudgetResponseis correctly documented and matches the protobuf definition.
2322-2326: Review the protobuf service definitions to ensure they are correctly defined and match the intended functionality.api/cosmos/protocolpool/v1/tx.pulsar.go (16)
1914-1920: Ensure that the field descriptors are correctly defined and match the protobuf message structure.
2011-2013: Check the logic for handlingBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it correctly reflects the protobuf structure and handles null cases appropriately.Verification successful
The review comment suggests verifying the handling of
BudgetPerTranchein the protobuf structure, particularly focusing on the correct handling of null cases and the overall structure.From the output of the script, we can observe several key points:
Protobuf Definition and Accessors:
BudgetPerTrancheis defined as a pointer to atypes.Coinstructure in various protobuf files (types.pb.go,tx.pb.go). This allows for the field to benil, representing a null case.Null Handling in Code: There are multiple checks for
nilacross different files (types.pb.go,tx.pb.go,types.pulsar.go,tx.pulsar.go). WhenBudgetPerTrancheisnil, new instances oftypes.Coinare often created, indicating robust handling of null cases.Usage in Business Logic: The field is used in calculations and logic, such as in the
keeper.gofile where it's used to calculate budget amounts left to distribute. This suggests that the field is integral to the business logic and is handled appropriately.Tests: The
msg_server_test.gofile includes tests whereBudgetPerTrancheis set to various values, including valid and invalid coins, which shows that the system is tested for both normal and edge cases.Given this information, it appears that the handling of
BudgetPerTranchein the protobuf structure, including null cases, is implemented correctly and thoroughly throughout the codebase. The checks forniland the initialization of new instances when needed are consistent with good programming practices for handling optional fields in protobufs.Based on the evidence from the script output and the analysis of how
BudgetPerTrancheis used and tested across the codebase, the handling of this field seems to be correct and robust.Final Response:
The handling of
BudgetPerTranchein the protobuf structure, including the management of null cases, has been verified and found to be implemented correctly across the codebase. The field is appropriately checked for null values, and there are sufficient tests covering various scenarios.
Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the handling of BudgetPerTranche in the protobuf structure. # Test: Search for the handling of BudgetPerTranche. Expect: Correct handling of null cases and structure. rg --type go $'BudgetPerTranche'Length of output: 8903
2054-2055: Ensure that the check forBudgetPerTranchebeing non-null is consistent with the expected behavior in the system.
2082-2083: Review the logic for settingBudgetPerTrancheto nil, ensuring it aligns with the intended use cases and system requirements.
2112-2113: Check the return value forBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it correctly uses the protobuf reflection.
2148-2149: Ensure that the assignment ofBudgetPerTranchefrom a protobuf message is handled correctly and safely.
2176-2180: Review the logic in theMutablemethod forBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it correctly initializes and returns the expected value.
2214-2214: Check the creation of a newBudgetPerTrancheinstance to ensure it is correctly initialized and returned.
2302-2303: Ensure that the size calculation forBudgetPerTrancheis accurate and aligns with the protobuf structure.
2379-2380: Review the marshaling logic forBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it handles errors appropriately and follows best practices.
2522-2522: Ensure that the error handling for the wrong wire type forBudgetPerTrancheis robust and provides clear error messages.
2549-2552: Review the unmarshaling logic forBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it correctly handles errors and initializes the field properly.
7019-7024: Ensure that the protobuf definition forBudgetPerTrancheis correctly annotated and matches the expected data types and structure.
7066-7068: Check the getter method forBudgetPerTrancheto ensure it correctly handles nil cases and returns the expected type.
Line range hint
7521-7536: Review the protobuf encoding forMsgSubmitBudgetProposalto ensure it correctly handles theBudgetPerTranchefield and aligns with the protobuf standards.
7741-7741: Ensure that the type references forbudget_per_tranchein the protobuf file are correct and match the expected types.
Description
Closes: #XXXX
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
!in the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.mdReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
Summary by CodeRabbit