Skip to content
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

Match orders in same block as they are placed #185

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 8, 2024
Merged

Match orders in same block as they are placed #185

merged 5 commits into from
Apr 8, 2024

Conversation

lumos42
Copy link

@lumos42 lumos42 commented Apr 1, 2024

How this works

In commitNewWork, when committing each transactions, we check whether the order(s) in the transaction match with any existing orders, and matching transactions are included in the same block.

How this was tested

On local

@lumos42 lumos42 requested review from atvanguard and debaghtk April 1, 2024 11:21
@lumos42
Copy link
Author

lumos42 commented Apr 1, 2024

@atvanguard @debaghtk please help with naming on new structs, files and functions

}
}
},
"singlenodeenabled": false
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nit] needs hyphenation like other values

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this name is interpreter by avalanche cli, we can't control it

"github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/common"
)

type OrderBookChecker interface {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit - OrderbookChecker

@atvanguard atvanguard merged commit 77be032 into aylin Apr 8, 2024
3 checks passed
@atvanguard atvanguard deleted the matching branch April 8, 2024 04:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants