added any erc20 support to payments #37
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
GriffGreen
reviewed
Jun 21, 2017
| @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ contract Escapable { | |||
| function escapeHatch() onlyEscapeHatchCaller { | |||
| uint total = getBalance(); | |||
| // Send the total balance of this contract to the `escapeHatchDestination` | |||
| transfer(escapeHatchDestination, total); | |||
| transfer(baseToken, escapeHatchDestination, total); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has it's own function and should not be added to the constructor
| function transfer(address _to, uint _amount) internal { | ||
| if (address(baseToken) != 0) { | ||
| if (!baseToken.transfer(_to, _amount)) throw; | ||
| function transfer(address _token, address _to, uint _amount) internal { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We will have to ask jordi but i think the better design is to have a second function for this
| @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ contract Escapable { | |||
| function escapeHatch() onlyEscapeHatchCaller { | |||
| uint total = getBalance(); | |||
| // Send the total balance of this contract to the `escapeHatchDestination` | |||
| transfer(escapeHatchDestination, total); | |||
| transfer(baseToken, escapeHatchDestination, total); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has it's own function, see claimTokens which may need to be renamed
| function transfer(address _to, uint _amount) internal { | ||
| if (address(baseToken) != 0) { | ||
| if (!baseToken.transfer(_to, _amount)) throw; | ||
| function transfer(address _token, address _to, uint _amount) internal { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has it's own function, see claimTokens which may need to be renamed... Honestly i dont think this contract needs changes
| @@ -204,6 +206,7 @@ contract Vault is Escapable, Owned { | |||
| function authorizePayment( | |||
| string _name, | |||
| bytes32 _reference, | |||
| address _token, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is a better strategy to create a second function for non-baseToken transfers... but we need to hear from jordi... it might be a few days
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Should fix #35.
Sorry for messing up in #36, I tried to fix it but github didn't updated the commits.