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

integration tests update for new contract version, added new test #11

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: feat/new-esdt-safe
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

axenteoctavian
Copy link
Collaborator

@axenteoctavian axenteoctavian commented Mar 5, 2025

Reasoning behind the pull request

Proposed changes

  • updated esdt-safe contract
  • new integration test with depositing main chain token (token without prefix)

Testing procedure

Pre-requisites

Based on the Contributing Guidelines the PR author and the reviewers must check the following requirements are met:

  • was the PR targeted to the correct branch?
  • if this is a larger feature that probably needs more than one PR, is there a feat branch created?
  • if this is a feat branch merging, do all satellite projects have a proper tag inside go.mod?

@axenteoctavian axenteoctavian self-assigned this Mar 5, 2025
@mariusmihaic mariusmihaic self-requested a review March 6, 2025 15:43
mariusmihaic
mariusmihaic previously approved these changes Mar 6, 2025
// - deposit the token in esdt-safe contract
// - check the sender balance is correct
// - check the token burned amount is correct after deposit
func TestSovereignChainSimulator_DeployBridgeContractsAndDepositMainChainToken(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[optional]
So this test "manually" -aka SetKeyValueForAddress + SetEsdtInWallet creates this main chain token in the sovereign chain as if it was previously bridged from main->sov.

Wouldn't it be a more interesting test to bring those main chain tokens first from main->sov, instead of "artifically" planting them here?

Just a thought, could've made the test more "real-life", could be done in another PR if you see it suitable

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added task MX-16637 for this improvement

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.

2 participants