refactor: token-metadata #458
Conversation
WalkthroughThe recent updates introduce a new class, Changes
TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review Status
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (3)
- packages/token-metadata/src/TokenFactoryStatic.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/token-metadata/src/index.ts (1 hunks)
- packages/token-metadata/src/types.ts (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (5)
packages/token-metadata/src/index.ts (2)
3-3: The import ofTokenFactoryStaticis correctly added to facilitate its export. Good job ensuring that new functionalities are accessible.
13-18: The updated export structure, including the addition ofTokenFactoryStatic, enhances the package's usability. The reordering of exports also improves clarity.packages/token-metadata/src/TokenFactoryStatic.ts (1)
31-48: The metadata retrieval methods are well-implemented. Consider adding documentation to clarify the fallback behavior ingetMetaBySymbolfor better maintainability.packages/token-metadata/src/types.ts (2)
8-8: The addition of theSymbolenum value toTokenTypeis a good enhancement, broadening the scope of token types that can be represented.
221-238: The introduction of theTokenStaticinterface significantly enriches the token metadata model, accommodating a wide range of token characteristics. Well done on this comprehensive addition.
| constructor(registry: TokenStatic[]) { | ||
| this.registry = registry | ||
| this.tokensByDenom = registry.reduce((list, token) => { | ||
| const denom = token.denom.toLowerCase() | ||
|
|
||
| if (list[denom]) { | ||
| return list | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return { ...list, [denom]: token } | ||
| }, {} as Record<string, TokenStatic>) | ||
|
|
||
| this.tokensBySymbol = registry.reduce((list, token) => { | ||
| const symbol = token.symbol.toLowerCase() | ||
|
|
||
| return { ...list, [symbol]: [...(list[symbol] || []), token] } | ||
| }, {} as Record<string, TokenStatic[]>) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider refining the population logic for tokensByDenom to accommodate multiple tokens with the same denomination but different attributes. This ensures a more comprehensive registry.
Summary by CodeRabbit