[Mainnet] Update StandardToken for uint256 support#32
[Mainnet] Update StandardToken for uint256 support#32StratisIain merged 8 commits intostratisproject:masterfrom
Conversation
| /// <param name="name">The name of the token.</param> | ||
| /// <param name="symbol">The symbol used to identify the token.</param> | ||
| public StandardToken(ISmartContractState smartContractState, ulong totalSupply, string name, string symbol) | ||
| public StandardToken(ISmartContractState smartContractState, Amount totalSupply, string name, string symbol) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can Amount be changed to UInt256? How would UInt128 be used? If possible it would be nice to use those types explicitly as UInt256 or UInt128.
Also, while we're here, can we add the Decimals property from this PR #17
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is better to use UInt256 explicitly in here otherwise it is confusing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now decimals update pr duplicated :) I want to push these changes first then can you apply your changes ? @mrtpain
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@quantumagi add decimals parameter to constructor and set it to property. Decimals methods should to be updated as Property getters/setters. @quantumagi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@YakupIpek @quantumagi - #17 is ready for review and merging, it's probably easiest/best to review and merge that into master, then update this branch with those changes and update the README included in that PR with the latest bytecode and hash after those changes are merged back into this branch.
|
This pr can be merged after Amount alias is removed. @quantumagi |
|
Btw it would be better to update testnet files first then we can create mainnet after being sure it is fine. Currently these are mainnet files. |
|
We should not release this code until a sufficient number of nodes have upgraded to PR 365: stratisproject/StratisFullNode#365. |
|
@YakupIpek , have you completed your review of this PR? |
|
Accidentally added comments to Testnet, should've been here. I approved already but would be good to update |
|
Pinging this and the related #33 PR for Testnet. Is EC Recover still a work in progress? Possibly the reason to keep these open rather than merging yet. |
|
Checked this against Testnet, there are some differences that can be copied/pasted over from Testnet whitelisted contract.
Only those two changes needed + compiling for new hash and bytecode. Might be worth adding a README to the directory including the hash and bytecode so developers know what it should be to compare with what they get when compiling. After that, this will be ready for a Mainnet whitelisting vote. |
|
I see some issues with the readme idea: (1) People verifying the code but not checking if the code corresponds to the hash. I.e. its better if people generate the hash for themselves. |
|
Whitelisted |
No description provided.