Closed brianmcmichael closed 3 years ago
We could make on
a boolean now, right?
Actually, we might not even need on
anymore, now that I think about it. If we require
in setup that line > 0
, we can do require(ilks[ilk]).line > 0);
, if so, it's enabled, since removing it deletes it from the mapping.
If we follow this approach maybe we can avoid using on
at all and just check that ilkLine > 0
.
lol I hadn't read your comment yeah let's go that way
But do you want to use require
or the if return
we have now?
Updated to remove on
and enforce line > 0
fixed nits
Simplifies the process of adding/updating/removing ilks. Removes the
file
function.Addition of an ilk required four external
file
calls, this replaces additions and updates with anenableIlk(bytes32 ilk, uint256 line, uint256 gap, uint256 ttl)
function.enableIlk("ETH-A", 500 * MILLION * RAD, 10 * MILLION * RAD, 1 hours)
enableIlk("ETH-A", 800 * MILLION * RAD, 10 * MILLION * RAD, 1 hours)
(requiring explicitness here will increase auditability in executives)disableIlk("ETH-A")
Open to alternative name ideas for functions/events