[WIP] Staking checkpointing #415
Closed
Conversation
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
bingen
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2018
| uint256 constant MAX_UINT192 = uint256(uint192(-1)); | ||
| uint256 constant MAX_UINT64 = uint256(uint64(-1)); | ||
|
|
||
| function add128(History storage self, uint192 value, uint64 time) internal { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does 128 in function name here mean? Shouldn't it be 192? Same below.
| @@ -14,7 +14,6 @@ contract Staking is ERCStaking, AragonApp { | |||
| uint64 constant public MAX_UINT64 = uint64(-1); | |||
|
|
|||
| struct Account { | |||
| uint256 amount; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we can get rid of the struct now, as it only has one field.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the reason for moving amount out of the struct, btw?
| @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ | |||
| pragma solidity 0.4.18; | |||
|
|
|||
| library Checkpointing { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the point of making this a Library? Is it going to be used outside of StakingHistory?
3 tasks
bingen
reviewed
Oct 3, 2018
| while (high > low) { | ||
| uint256 mid = (high + low + 1) / 2; // average, ceil round | ||
|
|
||
| if (time >= self.history[mid].time) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I would split this condition so if (time == self.history[mid].time) return self.history[mid].value;
|
Closed in favor of https://github.com/aragon/staking/ |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Implements a Staking sub-app that checkpoints a stake holder's balance on every stake/unstake action, conforming to the optional history methods of ERC900.
This is a required primitive for implementing stake-based voting with any ERC20 (w/o Minime) in a governance model that doesn't require locking tokens. An interesting combination would be a Voting app that requires a stake-lock in order to perform certain actions (create a proposal or vote favorably).
I'm currently thinking about whether we should move locking functionality off the main Staking contract in a similar fashion, as it would make it easier for us to implement different types of locking without adding exponential complexity, like it is currently happening with
overlockingin #409 (cc @bingen)To do:
StakingHistorywith existingstaking.jstests (✅ all passing)