Skip to content

Conversation

@ElusAegis
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@ElusAegis ElusAegis marked this pull request as ready for review November 26, 2025 16:48
Copy link
Collaborator

@zizou0x zizou0x left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just had a quick look at the overall logic and it looks good! I'll let @louise-poole review the protocol related things

@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
use substreams::prelude::BigInt;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not necessarily in this PR but if we start using this in many protocols I wonder if we shouldn't move it to tycho-substreams to avoid code repetition

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Literally had the same comment 😆

Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice! I'm very happy with the progress so far! Left a few comments, but overall the logic is sound and best practices were applied. Nice going 👍

/// Returns:
/// `Vec<Attribute>`: A vector containing Attributes for each change detected in the tracked
/// slots. Returns an empty vector if no changes are detected.
pub fn get_changed_attributes(
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I feel like it's warranted to move this into the tycho-substreams crate... it's used by a few protocols now. We should do that on a separate PR and merge it before updating this PR to use it.

Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know we're discussing changing how we track liquidity, however these are the corrections that would be needed for the current implementation if we were to stick with using events and deltas. The clarification of using "total_eth" as the component balance applies either way though.

@ElusAegis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you for the reviews, will address it later today

@ElusAegis ElusAegis force-pushed the ag/rocketpool-integration branch from e8b009b to 6559898 Compare November 29, 2025 12:56
Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great! I want to review the related simulation PR before I approve here (just to confirm we covered all necessary attributes etc). Left a few smaller comments in the meantime.

@ElusAegis ElusAegis force-pushed the ag/rocketpool-integration branch from d01ed6e to 78ed6c8 Compare December 2, 2025 22:55
Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great! Just some minor suggestions. Will approve once I see simulation work properly (I think we're close!).

@ElusAegis ElusAegis force-pushed the ag/rocketpool-integration branch from f67accf to 64506e1 Compare December 3, 2025 15:24
@ElusAegis
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have additionally updated the svm-rs-builds dependency to resolve the CI failing.

Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One last small adjustment and then I think we're ready! Once this is done, let's sync this in dev?

Copy link
Collaborator

@louise-poole louise-poole left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fantastic work on this 🔥

…act was activated and not from the point the V1.2 contract was deployed
…ot be running execution integration tests due to reasons explain in the integration_test
@ElusAegis ElusAegis force-pushed the ag/rocketpool-integration branch from 0848104 to af223ff Compare December 9, 2025 16:16
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.

5 participants