feat: xSuperchainERC20 #275
Conversation
| @@ -0,0 +1,328 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
| pragma solidity >=0.8.4 <0.9.0; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
XERC20 current implementation allows you to compile using a wide range of solidity versions but SuperchainERC20 is using a fixed version, in this case I think it is a good idea to use the more restrictive option to reduce compatibility errores. Use pragma solidity 0.8.25;
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| pragma solidity >=0.8.4 <0.9.0; | ||
|
|
||
| import { IXERC20 } from "interfaces/L2/IXERC20.sol"; | ||
| import { ERC20 } from "@solady-v0.0.245/tokens/ERC20.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
|
||
| /// @title XSuperchainERC20 | ||
| /// @notice A SuperchainERC20 + xERC20 implementation | ||
| contract XSuperchainERC20 is SuperchainERC20, Ownable, IXERC20 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lets make the contract abstract like SuperchainERC20
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| string private _name; | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * @notice The symbol of the token | ||
| */ | ||
| string private _symbol; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove these variables (since the contract will be abstract the override of the name() and symbol() functions should be done in the derived contract)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| string memory __name, | ||
| string memory __symbol, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove these params (since the contract will be abstract the override of the name() and symbol() functions should be done in the derived contract)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| _name = __name; | ||
| _symbol = __symbol; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove these assignations (since the contract will be abstract the override of the name() and symbol() functions should be done in the derived contract)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| /** | ||
| * @notice Returns the name of the token | ||
| * | ||
| * @return _name The name of the token | ||
| */ | ||
| function name() public view override returns (string memory) { | ||
| return _name; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * @notice Returns the symbol of the token | ||
| * | ||
| * @return _symbol The symbol of the token | ||
| */ | ||
| function symbol() public view override returns (string memory) { | ||
| return _symbol; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove these functions (since the contract will be abstract the override of the name() and symbol() functions should be done in the derived contract)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
|
||
| contract XSuperchainERC20Test is SuperchainERC20Test { | ||
| function setUp() public override { | ||
| superchainERC20 = new XSuperchainERC20("Test", "TEST", address(0)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since the contract will be abstract a mock contract will be needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| * @param _bridge The address of the bridge we are setting the limits too | ||
| */ | ||
| function setLimits(address _bridge, uint256 _mintingLimit, uint256 _burningLimit) external onlyOwner { | ||
| if (_mintingLimit > (type(uint256).max / 2) || _burningLimit > (type(uint256).max / 2)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lets use bit shifting for this one. Just because it looks cooler 😎
| if (_mintingLimit > (type(uint256).max / 2) || _burningLimit > (type(uint256).max / 2)) { | |
| if (_mintingLimit > (type(uint256).max >> 1) || _burningLimit > (type(uint256).max >> 1)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Look cooler? I think you mean saving 2 gas per tx 😎 perf(xSupERC20): optimize uint256/2 check
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if we should add this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know how that lib showed up lol. Fixed in chore: remove automate lib
No description provided.