adjustLoan vs single action endpoints about dev HOT 5 CLOSED

Should we remove the other ones?

Is there a big difference in gas costs between the calling adjustLoan with 0/+, 0/-, +/0 or -/0 and calling the 4 specific functions? If not, I'm fine with removing the latter and just leave adjustLoan.

Do we expect it to be called with the 8 possible combinations? (+/+, +/-, -/+, -/-, 0/+, 0/-, +/0, -/0) Otherwise, we should prevent the undesired ones with require’s

I'd assume that for now. It would also be a bit strange to disallow certain combinations from UX perspective.

from dev.

Nice to have thing.

Low priority, but easy fix on the back end.
Keep old functions as wrappers.

from dev.

Please make sure to update the relevant sections in the Readme once the new API is in place.

from dev.

Some helpful comments by @cvalkan :
“Shouldn't L359 BorrowerOperations:
_requireNewTCRisAboveCCR(L.collChange, L.isCollIncrease, L.rawDebtChange, _isDebtIncrease, L.price);
be
if (isDebtIncrease) {_requireNewTCRisAboveCCR(L.collChange, L.isCollIncrease, L.rawDebtChange, _isDebtIncrease, L.price);}
?
To make sure it works the same way as withdrawColl(). Collateral withdrawal should be possible even if the system would enter Recovery Mode.
I think we also need to change L330 to make sure that adjustLoan() exactly replicates the 4 base functions”

from dev.

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version @liquity/lib-ethers-v1.0.0 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

from dev.