fix: remove subdenom display check

[fmorency]

Fixes #220

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Simplified validation logic for token display field
  • Removed unnecessary subdenom check in token details form validation

The changes focus on streamlining the validation process for token metadata, making the form validation more straightforward while maintaining core validation requirements.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the validation schema for the display field in token-related forms, specifically in TokenDetailsForm.tsx and updateDenomMetadata.tsx. The changes remove a previous requirement that the display field must contain a subdenom, simplifying the validation logic. Now, the display field only needs to be a non-empty string that passes the noProfanity check, allowing more flexibility in token naming and display.

Changes

File	Change Summary
components/factory/forms/TokenDetailsForm.tsx	Removed custom subdenom validation test for display field
components/factory/modals/updateDenomMetadata.tsx	Simplified display field validation by removing subdenom inclusion check

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Remove "ticker should contain subdenom" check [#220]	✅

Possibly related PRs

• fix: tf create and update metadata #20: Direct relation to validation logic modifications for display field
• fix: validate ticker contains subdenom #123: Previous modifications to display field validation
• Add denom prefix #182: Denom prefix and full denom construction changes

Suggested labels

bug

Suggested reviewers

• chalabi2

Poem

🐰 Validation's dance, a simpler tune,
Subdenom's chains now come undone
Freedom for tokens, big and small
No more constraints to hold them tall
A rabbit's code, now light and free! 🎉

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (main@db082ac). Learn more about missing BASE report.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
components/factory/modals/updateDenomMetadata.tsx	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #221   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   54.35%           
=======================================
  Files           ?      153           
  Lines           ?    15844           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     8612           
  Misses          ?     7232           
  Partials        ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between db082ac and 6e813bd.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• components/factory/forms/TokenDetailsForm.tsx (1 hunks)
• components/factory/modals/updateDenomMetadata.tsx (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch

components/factory/modals/updateDenomMetadata.tsx

[warning] 18-18: components/factory/modals/updateDenomMetadata.tsx#L18
Added line #L18 was not covered by tests

🔇 Additional comments (1)

components/factory/forms/TokenDetailsForm.tsx (1)

21-21: LGTM! Validation schema simplified as intended.

The removal of the subdenom display check aligns with the PR objectives while maintaining essential validation (required field, profanity check).

Let's verify test coverage for the updated validation logic:

[chalabi2]

What are we doing now to ensure the subdenom is contained within the params of the metadata tx?

[fmorency]

What are we doing now to ensure the subdenom is contained within the params of the metadata tx?

I'm not sure I understand the question. Why is this important?

It is not enforced on-chain anyway.

[chalabi2]

lgtm