feat(wallet): expose set_withdraw_vesting_route in the HP action list - #60
Conversation
Clients build the HP operation buttons from this list, so the withdraw routes UI they already implement has no entry point. Add the chain operation name alongside the existing two ids. Adds a parity divergence entry and pins the action ids with tests.
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 47 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Greptile SummaryAdds the withdraw-vesting-route operation to the ordered HP action list.
Confidence Score: 4/5The runtime feature appears safe to merge, but portfolio response-body parity remains unverified. The previous broad exemption was removed, restoring status and content-type checks, but ordinary dynamic response changes still classify the populated portfolio case as loose and bypass every body comparison. Files Needing Attention: dotnet/parity/driver.py
|
| Filename | Overview |
|---|---|
| dotnet/EcencyApi/Handlers/WalletApi.Market.cs | Appends set_withdraw_vesting_route to the client-facing HP action list. |
| dotnet/EcencyApi.Tests/WalletActionsTests.cs | Adds coverage for HP action ordering and savings-dependent wallet actions. |
| dotnet/parity/driver.py | Removes the endpoint-wide known-divergence exemption while retaining loose status and content-type comparison. |
Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "review: drop the portfolio-v2 parity exe..." | Re-trigger Greptile
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9ec54e9ca8
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| "/wallet-api/portfolio-v2::pop": | ||
| "The HP action list gained set_withdraw_vesting_route so clients can link " | ||
| "straight to the withdraw routes UI; the reference build emits only " | ||
| "delegate_vesting_shares and withdraw_vesting.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When the differential harness compares the populated /wallet-api/portfolio-v2 case, adding it to KNOWN_DIVERGENCES causes the loop to continue before checking even the status, content type, or any unrelated response fields. Consequently, regressions anywhere in this large aggregation endpoint now produce a clean parity run. Normalize or specially compare only the added HP action instead of exempting the entire case.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Valid, fixed in 7633c76 by removing the entry rather than narrowing it.
Confirmed the mechanism: KNOWN_DIVERGENCES hits continue before any comparison, so it would have skipped status and content-type too, not just the body.
Went further than narrowing the comparison because this case can never be body-compared anyway. norm_body only parses JSON, it does no nondeterminism smoothing, and portfolio-v2 balances and APR move every block, so the case already lands in loose on a run-vs-run diff. loose skips only the body and still checks status and content-type, which is strictly better than what my entry did. The exemption was therefore redundant on the body and harmful on everything else.
Left a comment in its place explaining why the case is deliberately absent, so the next person does not re-add it.
A KNOWN_DIVERGENCES entry skips the case entirely, status and content-type included, which would hide unrelated regressions in the whole aggregation endpoint. The body is already exempt via loose comparison because balances and APR move every block, and that path still checks status and content-type.
1 participant
HpActions()returned onlydelegate_vesting_sharesandwithdraw_vesting. Both clients build their HP operation buttons from this list, so the withdraw routes UI each of them already implements had no direct entry point.Adds
set_withdraw_vesting_route, the chain operation name, matching the style of the two existing ids. Appended last because clients render actions in list order.KNOWN_DIVERGENCESentry for/wallet-api/portfolio-v2::pop, since the reference build emits the shorter listWalletActionsTestspins the HP ids and order, plus the savings-conditional HIVE/HBD buildersMerge last. Merging here deploys to production immediately, and the clients need to recognize the id first: