QA Report #281
Labels
bug
Something isn't working
old-submission-method
QA (Quality Assurance)
Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax
Typos
ERC20PermitPermissionedMint.sol: L78
Change
nonexistant
tononexistent
frxETHMinter.sol: L78-81
Change
sfrxeth_recieved
tosfrxeth_received
in each casefrxETHMinter.sol: L176
/// @notice Toggle allowing submites
Change
submites
tosubmits
xERC4626.sol: L43
/// @notice Compute the amount of tokens available to share holders.
Change
share holders
toshareholders
Long single line comments
In theory, comments over 79 characters should wrap using multi-line comment syntax. Even if somewhat longer comments are acceptable and a scroll bar is provided, there are cases where very long comments interfere with readability. Below are five instances of extra-long comments whose readability could be improved through wrapping, as shown:
sfrxETH.sol: L31-39
Suggestion:
frxETHMinter.sol: L33-36
Suggestion:
frxETHMinter.sol: L138-139
Suggestion:
xERC4626.sol: L11-19
Suggestion:
xERC4626.sol: L77
/// All surplus `asset` balance of the contract over the internal balance becomes queued for the next cycle.
Suggestion:
Update sensitive terms in both comments and code
Terms incorporating "black," "white," "slave" or "master" are potentially problematic. Substituting more neutral terminology is becoming common practice.
ERC20PermitPermissionedMint.sol: L64
// Adds whitelisted minters
Suggestion: Change
whitelisted
toallowlisted
orallowed
Missing
@param
statements@param
statements, which document parameters, are missing for most of thefunctions
andconstructors
in theFrax Ether
in-scope contracts (a@param
statement is given for one function parameter: frxETHMinter.sol: L157). Below are examples of missing@param
statements, however there are dozens more that need to be addressed.function
example:sfrxETH.sol: L47-51
@param
statements missing forassets
andshares
constructor
example:sfrxETH.sol: L41-44
@param
statements missing for_underlying
and_rewardsCycleLength
Inconsistent
require
string punctuationWhile
require
messages may be punctuated as either "message" or 'message', the treatment should be consistent within a contest. Below is the only message surrounded by ' ' instead of " ":frxETHMinter.sol: L79
Suggestion: Change message to
"No sfrxETH was returned"
Incorrect
require
statement syntaxfrxETHMinter.sol: L160
Recommendation: Remove unneeded space between
require
and(
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: