George Knee
George Knee
The following pattern dispatches a number of asynchronous functions that return Promises, but does not await those Promises: https://github.com/statechannels/statechannels/blob/cace0280eeed0f261076d0b284a089470d75d5fa/packages/nitro-protocol/test/contracts/AssetHolder/transfer.test.ts#L76-L82 This can lead to the following warning: ``` Jest did not...
The tests in nitro-protocol do *not* use the `--runInBand` flag. This means that they run concurrently, decreasing test durations but increasing the chance of unwanted interaction between test files. The...
Take a look at the `payouts` in test case 8: https://github.com/statechannels/statechannels/blob/cace0280eeed0f261076d0b284a089470d75d5fa/packages/nitro-protocol/test/contracts/AssetHolder/claimAll.test.ts#L52-L60 `payouts` should form part of a test assertion in this file: but they currently do not. You can see...
**Problem description :confused:** The server wallet will validate transitions as it adds states to the store, and also validates them when it calls into `clearOldStates` (because `clearOldStates` calls in to...
Could we take care of the TODO? _Originally posted by @lalexgap in https://github.com/statechannels/statechannels/pull/3320#discussion_r581591884_
I always found having the participants set to `[]` sometimes is kinda confusing. Could we just get rid of this? Or store it properly? _Originally posted by @lalexgap in https://github.com/statechannels/statechannels/pull/3320#discussion_r579435621_
# Why: Problem description :confused: We have two very similar API methods in the server wallet: - `pushMessage` and - `pushUpdate` The former triggers objectives to be cranked. The latter...
This is to be coordinated with https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/superchain-registry/pull/101. See that PR and linked issue for full context.
Towards https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/client-pod/issues/739