[CHORE] Update comparison match logic for opposite amounts #76
Conversation
qiwu7
changed the title
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2823
💛 - Coveralls |
qiwu7
force-pushed
the
fix/comparison_match
branch
from
53f3737
to
82420b1
Compare
qiwu7
force-pushed
the
fix/comparison_match
branch
from
3533036
to
e10f1e2
Compare
parser/match_operations.go
Outdated
| ) | ||
| } | ||
| // check if all operations within the same match slice have the same amount | ||
| if len(matchOps) > 1 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you can remove this if statement as we assume it must be true (assuming matchIndex is not negative, which it should never be)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
equalAmounts method will return err if length of the operations is less than 1.
https://github.com/coinbase/rosetta-sdk-go/blob/master/parser/match_operations.go#L304-L306
|
@qiwu7 to fix the |
qiwu7
force-pushed
the
fix/comparison_match
branch
from
793bdea
to
a105399
Compare
parser/match_operations.go
Outdated
| return fmt.Errorf("%w: amounts not opposites", err) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if err := matchOperationsForOppositeComparisonValid(amountMatch[0], matches); err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On further thought, I suggest we remove matchOperationsForOppositeComparisonValid because we are just wrapping equalAmounts with the conditionals it already contains (which I think is a bad practice).
| if err := matchOperationsForOppositeComparisonValid(amountMatch[0], matches); err != nil { | |
| if err := equalAmounts(matches[amountMatch[0]].Operations); err != nil { | |
| return fmt.Errorf("%w: amounts not equal within index %d match operations", err, amountMatch[0]) | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we want to surface better errors in these cases (length 0 vs length 1), I'd suggest modifying equalAmounts itself instead of writing conditionals outside so that we don't hit this: https://github.com/coinbase/rosetta-sdk-go/blob/f929bfc4a262afbbb4053570664be00053a0b657/parser/match_operations.go#L304-L306
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we still want to allow len(ops) == 1 to be considered equal in some cases, we could add another arg that specifies if this should be allowed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still thinking if we'd want to consider operation amounts equal if there is only 1 op.
|
Review Error for patrick-ogrady @ 2020-07-22 20:05:58 UTC |
| @@ -301,8 +301,8 @@ func operationMatch( | |||
| // equalAmounts returns an error if a slice of operations do not have | |||
| // equal amounts. | |||
| func equalAmounts(ops []*types.Operation) error { | |||
| if len(ops) <= 1 { | |||
| return fmt.Errorf("cannot check equality of %d operations", len(ops)) | |||
| if len(ops) == 0 { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would've expected this test to trigger a test change...can we write a simple one for testing equal amounts with 1 op? @qiwu7
There was a problem hiding this comment.
actually there already are test cases for equalAmounts with only 1 op, that's why the test was failing previously.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
cool. I can help review that when it's ready :)
Fixes # .
Motivation
Update comparison match logic for opposite amounts
Solution
use a single for loop instead of nested to simply things
Open questions