-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 133
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
Move the most recent value in sats of an order calculation to the backend #224
Comments
Indeed, we keep track of t0_satoshis (simply noting them down). It might be truem that after that, t0_satoshis sees no use, altough, their intended use was to for validation that the order is not larger than the max order allowed (we might have used
|
I have been revisiting this proposal, and I'm staring to consider I was wrong about the need of having |
I also found we print the |
The |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
As discussed in #219 we want to move the most recent value in sats of an order calculation to the backend.
Describe the solution you'd like
I found these 2:
https://github.com/Reckless-Satoshi/robosats/blob/eff58dc91d93fe98a6738e0e3898ed2a476d2ebc/api/models.py#L382
https://github.com/Reckless-Satoshi/robosats/blob/eff58dc91d93fe98a6738e0e3898ed2a476d2ebc/api/models.py#L390
but the only logic for
t0_satoshis
is this:https://github.com/Reckless-Satoshi/robosats/blob/eff58dc91d93fe98a6738e0e3898ed2a476d2ebc/api/views.py#L146
Looks like there was an original intention to keep the sats on creation and the sats right now, that's cool, but at some point it got lost and
last_satoshis
was used ast0_satoshis
.I like the original idea, I had a look and there are not too many places where
last_satoshis
is being usedhttps://github.com/Reckless-Satoshi/robosats/search?q=last_satoshis
Is it a good idea to try a renaming? so we use
t0_satoshis
everywhere and start calculatinglast_satoshis
on every request?Describe alternatives you've considered
We might just create a new parameter and leave the other params as they are.
Additional context
I would create 2 separate PR. First one that fix the naming. And a second one that actually adds the new calculation and expose it on the endpoint.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: