simplify the token timelock example #359
Comments
leighmcculloch
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 22, 2025
Related to #359 Simplify the token timelock example by renaming, supporting a single claimant, and using a p22 constructor. * **Renaming:** - Rename the folder to `token-timelock`. - Rename the contract to `TokenTimelockContract` in `token-timelock/src/lib.rs`. * **Single Claimant Support:** - Update `ClaimableBalance` struct to support a single claimant instead of a vector of claimants in `token-timelock/src/lib.rs`. * **p22 Constructor:** - Replace the `deposit` function with a p22 constructor named `__constructor` in `token-timelock/src/lib.rs`. * **Time Bound:** - Update `TimeBound` struct to only support "valid after" semantics in `token-timelock/src/lib.rs`. * **Tests:** - Update tests to use `TokenTimelockContract` and support a single claimant in `token-timelock/src/test.rs`. --- For more details, open the [Copilot Workspace session](https://copilot-workspace.githubnext.com/stellar/soroban-examples/issues/359?shareId=XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The token timelock example is important because it's a well understood simple concept that touches on how to work with tokens. I propose implementing a few simplifications/clarifications in order to enhance it's readability and usability as learning material:
timelockbut the contract is calledCalimbaleBalance. I suggest standardizing ontoken-timelockandTokenTimelockContractTimeboundand only support "valid after" semanticsdeposit()to a p22 constructorThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: