Closed tserg closed 8 months ago
IMO this suggested fix goes against the expected use of the function and the Allocator's functionality. In the test case, new recipient 1
's allocation will be 41.115 but that's not obvious and probably not intended. An error like that can easily sneak in via a copy-paste mistake when preparing a update script.
If we're going to fix it, I'd rather prevent this address duplication issue.
Instead of preventing duplicate addresses (user error), I think it is sufficient to ensure that the percentage value is not overwritten (which affects correctness).
Resolves https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-01-opus-findings/issues/122