Skip to content

docs: add feature parity table for contract source trees - #2

Open
Nikola-Tee wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/contract-tree-feature-parity-table
Open

docs: add feature parity table for contract source trees#2
Nikola-Tee wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/contract-tree-feature-parity-table

Conversation

@Nikola-Tee

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

Adds a feature parity table (docs/contract-tree-feature-parity.md) comparing the canonical COMEBACKHERE-contracts/ workspace with the legacy contracts/ workspace.

Changes

Why this matters

Contributors have no quick way to see which features exist in the canonical tree but are missing from the legacy tree without manually diffing both trees. This table provides an at-a-glance reference and a checklist for resolving parity gaps.


Closes WHEELBACK#477

Document which contracts, modules, and tests exist in the canonical
COMEBACKHERE-contracts/ tree versus the legacy contracts/ tree, with
cross-references to related issues (WHEELBACK#182, WHEELBACK#186) and a migration
checklist for reaching full parity.

Closes WHEELBACK#477

🤖 Generated with Codebuff
Co-Authored-By: Codebuff <noreply@codebuff.com>
levoski1 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 30, 2026
The minimum amount check (10,000,000 stroops / 1 USDC) added in WHEELBACK#11 had
tests for values above and below the threshold, but nothing asserting
the boundary value itself. Adds:
- a test creating an invoice with amount == 10_000_000, asserting success
- a test with 10_000_000 - 1, asserting AmountPrecision is returned

The WHEELBACK#11 check itself was never actually present in the current invoice
contract — it only ever existed in an old, abandoned contract layout
(contracts/invoice/src/lib.rs) that predates the current
COMEBACKHERE-contracts/contracts/invoice/src/lib.rs rewrite, so it was
silently dropped. Re-adds MIN_AMOUNT_USDC validation (rejecting
create_invoice with a new ContractError::AmountPrecision) so the
boundary tests have something to assert against, and bumps existing
tests' hardcoded amounts above the new minimum.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

docs: add a comparison table of contracts/ vs COMEBACKHERE-contracts/ feature parity

1 participant