Repository navigation
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Thanks, the label fix is right and is recreated in ProjectOpenSea/opensea-devtools#789 (now merged) with you credited. One correction so the record matches the diff: the changed line is in This repo is a read-only mirror, so we can't merge here, but we review every PR. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
getOfferPaymentTokenlabels Avalanche's0xB31f66AA…66c7as// WETH. Itis WAVAX. The label was copy-pasted from the
Chain.Polygoncase directlyabove it.
Both now name the right thing.
Why the first one is worth fixing
getListingPaymentToken, ~100 lines above, already labels the same address// WAVAX, andtest/utils/chain.spec.tscalls it "returns WAVAX forAvalanche" for this very function. The comment was the only statement in the
file asserting the wrong token.
Scope
Comments only — no behaviour, no types, no signatures. Nothing here needs a new
test: the underlying behaviour is already pinned by
test/utils/chain.spec.ts(the Avalanche address) and bycheck-types(the
ownedByfield name).