Skip to content
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

Update DepositContract.t.sol #2098

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

MAXo4IM
Copy link

@MAXo4IM MAXo4IM commented Oct 24, 2024

Fixed some aesthetic errors.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Corrected the expected emitted event value in the test_Deposit function.
    • Updated expected deposit amount in testFuzz_DepositCount.
  • New Features

    • Introduced constants for OWNER and DEPOSITOR to improve clarity in test cases.
  • Refactor

    • Updated test functions to consistently use the new constants instead of direct variable assignments.

Fixed some aesthetic errors.


Signed-off-by: MaxBT <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 24, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes made to the DepositContractTest in the Solidity test file involve renaming the depositor variable to DEPOSITOR, which is now defined as a constant. A new constant OWNER has also been introduced. The setUp function has been updated to utilize these constants instead of direct address assignments. Additionally, multiple test functions have been modified to consistently use the DEPOSITOR constant, and corrections have been made to expected emitted events and parameter types in the fuzz tests.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
contracts/test/staking/DepositContract.t.sol - Renamed address internal depositor to address internal constant DEPOSITOR.
- Added address internal constant OWNER.
- Updated setUp function to use OWNER and DEPOSITOR constants.
- Modified multiple test functions to use DEPOSITOR constant.
- Corrected expected emitted event value in test_Deposit from 32 gwei to 32e9.
- Updated testFuzz_DepositCount to reflect constant usage and changed expected deposit amount to 32e9.
- Changed parameter types for pubKey and credentials from calldata to memory in fuzz tests.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Test as DepositContractTest
    participant Setup as SetUp Function
    participant TestFunc as Test Functions
    participant Constants as Constants

    Test->>Setup: Call setUp()
    Setup->>Constants: Use OWNER and DEPOSITOR
    Setup-->>Test: Setup complete

    Test->>TestFunc: Execute test functions
    TestFunc->>Constants: Access DEPOSITOR
    TestFunc-->>Test: Tests executed with constants
Loading

🐇 "In the land of code, where constants bloom,
DEPOSITOR and OWNER make room.
With tests so clear, no need to fret,
A rabbit's cheer for the code we beget!
Constants in hand, we hop with delight,
In Solidity's world, everything feels right!" 🐇


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range comments (1)
contracts/test/staking/DepositContract.t.sol (1)

Line range hint 98-106: Consider using consistent units throughout the test.

There's a potential confusion in the test_Deposit function:

  • Line 98 uses 32 ether for vm.deal
  • Line 102 uses 32e9 for the expected event

While these values are equivalent (1 ether = 1e18 wei, and 32e9 gwei = 32 ether), using consistent units would make the test more readable and maintainable.

Consider using either:

-        vm.deal(DEPOSITOR, 32 ether);
-        vm.prank(DEPOSITOR);
-        vm.expectEmit(true, true, true, true);
-        emit IDepositContract.Deposit(
-            VALIDATOR_PUBKEY, STAKING_CREDENTIALS, 32e9, _create96Byte(), 0
-        );
+        uint256 depositAmount = 32 ether;
+        vm.deal(DEPOSITOR, depositAmount);
+        vm.prank(DEPOSITOR);
+        vm.expectEmit(true, true, true, true);
+        emit IDepositContract.Deposit(
+            VALIDATOR_PUBKEY, STAKING_CREDENTIALS, depositAmount, _create96Byte(), 0
+        );
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between aec2501 and d0665f7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • contracts/test/staking/DepositContract.t.sol (9 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
contracts/test/staking/DepositContract.t.sol (6)

10-13: LGTM! Good use of constants for test addresses.

Converting the addresses to constants improves code maintainability and makes the test setup more explicit. The initialization in setUp properly uses these constants for contract deployment and permissions setup.

Also applies to: 22-22, 30-32


35-38: LGTM! Comprehensive validation of public key length requirements.

The tests properly validate both fuzzing and static scenarios for invalid public key lengths. Good use of vm.prank with the DEPOSITOR constant for permission control.

Also applies to: 49-54


58-64: LGTM! Well-structured credential validation tests.

The tests effectively cover both fuzzing and static scenarios for invalid credential lengths. Proper error validation and permission handling is maintained.

Also applies to: 70-73


109-115: LGTM! Thorough validation of minimum deposit requirements.

The tests effectively cover both fuzzing and static scenarios for insufficient deposits, with proper bounds checking and error validation.

Also applies to: 121-127


Line range hint 132-138: LGTM! Comprehensive validation of Gwei divisibility requirements.

The tests effectively cover various scenarios for non-Gwei-divisible amounts, including edge cases both above and below the expected deposit amount.

Also applies to: 143-156


173-189: LGTM! Well-structured multiple deposit validation.

The test effectively validates multiple deposits with proper event emission checks and deposit count verification. Good use of vm.startPrank for handling multiple transactions from the same address.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant