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

slither fixes #32

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 28, 2024
Merged

slither fixes #32

merged 6 commits into from
Aug 28, 2024

Conversation

mejango
Copy link
Contributor

@mejango mejango commented Jul 25, 2024

Description

fixed slither

Limitations & risks

Are there any trade-off or new vulnarbility surface based on theses changes?

Check-list

  • Tests are covering the new feature
  • Code is natspec'd
  • Code is linted and formatted
  • I have run the test locally (and they pass)
  • I have rebased to the latest main commit (and tests still pass)

Interactions

These changes will impact the following contracts:

  • Directly:

  • Indirectly:

error JBBuybackHook_InvalidTwapWindow(uint256 value, uint256 min, uint256 max);
error JBBuybackHook_PoolAlreadySet(IUniswapV3Pool pool);
error JBBuybackHook_SpecifiedSlippageExceeded(uint256 amount, uint256 minimum);
error JBBuybackHook_Unauthorized(address caller);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: I feel like the JBBuybackHook_ prefix doesn't really make sense for the Unauthorized error. Since its used in a lot of places and this would make it so each contract gets its own signature for this error, for UIs it feels more comfortable if we use the same error(s) in lots of places.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense.
counterpoint would be that a UI would want to know which unauthorized is being triggered, else it’s unclear where the error comes from.

script/Deploy.s.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mejango mejango merged commit a82a35a into main Aug 28, 2024
3 checks passed
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