-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 520
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix Autofill validation of DeliverMax
and Amount
#2857
Open
JordiParraCrespo
wants to merge
4
commits into
XRPLF:main
Choose a base branch
from
Peersyst:xrpl/fix/autofill-same-amounts-validation
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e7d6001
fix(xrpl): autofill not validating correctly DeliverMax and Amount wh…
JordiParraCrespo 0e54f15
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:XRPLF/xrpl.js into xrpl/fix/autofil…
JordiParraCrespo ef8efd7
fix(xrpl.js): improve areAmountsEqual validator
JordiParraCrespo 3bfec9d
test(xrpl): fix description in autofill test
JordiParraCrespo File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Missing test coverage for the
areAmountsEqual
functionThis utility function handles critical amount comparisons for different currency types (XRP, IssuedCurrency, MPTAmount) and is used in transaction validation, but appears to lack dedicated test coverage. Consider adding comprehensive tests to verify:
🔗 Analysis chain
Implementation looks solid and addresses the original bug.
The function correctly handles all amount types (XRP, IssuedCurrency, MPTAmount) with proper validation and precise numeric comparisons using BigNumber. The implementation aligns with the PR objectives to fix amount validation issues.
Let's verify the test coverage for this new function:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 101
Script:
Length of output: 155
Script:
Length of output: 3762