WIP: Contribution contracts tests #159
@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
|
||||
|
|
||||
const ethers = require('ethers');
|
||||
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
const namehash = require('ethers').utils.namehash;
|
||||
|
||||
// eslint-disable-next-line no-undef
|
||||
@ -48,7 +47,6 @@ const mineBlock = function() {
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
|
||||
contract('Contribution app', (accounts) => {
|
||||
// eslint-disable-next-line no-undef
|
||||
let ethProvider = new ethers.providers.Web3Provider(web3.currentProvider);
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
let kernelBase, aclBase, daoFactory, r, dao, acl, contribution, token, contributor;
|
||||
|
||||
const root = accounts[0];
|
||||
@ -234,8 +232,6 @@ contract('Contribution app', (accounts) => {
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
it("veto contribution", async () => {
|
||||
const contributionId = await contribution.contributionsCount();
|
||||
let contributionObject = await contribution.getContribution(contributionId.toNumber());
|
||||
console.log("veto block: " + contributionObject[7]);
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
console.log("current block: " + await ethProvider.getBlockNumber());
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
await contribution.veto(contributionId.toNumber(), {from: root});
|
||||
// eslint-disable-next-line no-undef
|
||||
assert(contributionObject[9], true);
|
||||
@ -282,8 +278,6 @@ contract('Contribution app', (accounts) => {
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
await mineBlock();
|
||||
|
||||
let contributionObject = await contribution.getContribution(contributionId.toNumber());
|
||||
console.log("claim block: " + contributionObject[7]);
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
console.log("current block: " + await ethProvider.getBlockNumber());
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
|
||||
await contribution.claim(contributionId);
|
||||
// eslint-disable-next-line no-undef
|
||||
|
||||
|
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
this one revert for some reasons this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here ( Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (`it("does x")`). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to `assert()`, in case you really want to assert multiple things in one `it` block.
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario? Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions. How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added. They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
ahhhh yup okay, missed this ahhhh yup okay, missed this ` require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE'); ` thanks!
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block. In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ? this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc. Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
|
||||
this one revert for some reasons
this one revert for some reasons
Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (
it("does x")). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.Looks like the expectation wasn't described here (
it("does x")). It also looks like there are 3 different expectations in one block here.I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to
assert(), in case you really want to assert multiple things in oneitblock.I think you can also add expectation descriptions as the last argument to
assert(), in case you really want to assert multiple things in oneitblock.Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
Reverts unexpectedly? And in which context/scenario?
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
in the scenario of claiming an added contribution
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
most of those multiple assert check for the same thing, that the contribution is added.. XD
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
How would that work? You can only claim confirmed contributions.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
They very line I commented on asserts that the contributorId is correct, not that the contribution itself was added.
ahhhh yup okay, missed this
require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE');thanks!ahhhh yup okay, missed this
require(block.number >= c.confirmedAtBlock, 'NOT_CLAIMABLE');thanks!yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
yeah true, honestly don't know if that all those asserts are necessary... maybe just for more code coverage
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
In this case it's only important that you describe what you mean to test exactly. Currently, there's no description of what is being tested in this block.
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
this should fix the claim tests, no @skddc @bumi ?
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
idk if this test is really necessary as if a contribution is claimed, so theoretically it is impossible to veto because of block number @bumi
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
can't figure out why this one is not working, idk what I'm missing there! @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
blocks get minted and the veto period end right away... @bumi @skddc
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.
Yes, the first 10 are confirmed immediately iirc.