Feat/initial distrib constructor #64
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
I still need to write specific tests to try tricky scenarios |
enitrat
reviewed
Dec 17, 2023
…na/unruggable-memecoin into feat/initial_distrib_constructor
|
Added tests, should be ready now |
|
I need to sync my work with the main branch and it will be ready for merging |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Issue: #60
This is a first draft.
In the proposed implementation, the dev would pass an array
initial_holdersof tuples(initial_holder_address, amount).The
initial_recipientshould be in the position 0 of the array. Asinitial_recipientis aninitial_holder, it makes sense to add him in the array. But it implies that the sum of all amounts of theinitial_holdersarray should remain equal toinitial_supply. This is verified by line 116assert(initial_minted_supply <= initial_supply, 'Unruggable: max supply reached');.I'm also considering that the
initial_recipientaccount should deposit ALL of his tokens whenlaunch_memecoinis called.. Otherwise it is not possible to perform the "team allocation" check since the balance ofinitial_recipientwould be greater. Ifinitial_recipientdoes not deposit all of his token inlaunch_memecointhen I'm not performing the "max team allocation" check on him which bypasses the rule (does that make sense ?).Didn't write the tests yet, I wanted to have feedbacks on my implementation.