Why cw20-base do not care about minting cap?

[pronvis]

I found that cw20-base contract do not use cap field from: https://github.com/CosmWasm/cosmwasm-plus/blob/9c37cca15bd341d44e3e855f92fcf61b5a125b1e/packages/cw20/src/query.rs#L65

Why?
https://github.com/CosmWasm/cosmwasm-plus/blob/9c37cca15bd341d44e3e855f92fcf61b5a125b1e/contracts/cw20-base/src/contract.rs#L193

[ethanfrey]

12 lines below the line you linked, the cap is enforced: https://github.com/CosmWasm/cosmwasm-plus/blob/9c37cca15bd341d44e3e855f92fcf61b5a125b1e/contracts/cw20-base/src/contract.rs#L209-L215

[pronvis]

@ethanfrey mmm, yes, you are right. But this cap checks total_cap, but comment on cap field says:
https://github.com/CosmWasm/cosmwasm-plus/blob/9c37cca15bd341d44e3e855f92fcf61b5a125b1e/packages/cw20/src/query.rs#L64
issued by the minter
I understand that in this way. If my cap = 100, then at total I can't mint more than 100 tokens. Total supply is a bit different thing, isn't it?

[ethanfrey]

I understand that in this way. If my cap = 100, then at total I can't mint more than 100 tokens. Total supply is a bit different thing, isn't it?

Then the comment should be updated. My intention when writing it, is "mintable with cap" enforced a maximum supply that can be minted in the end (and if you burn some tokens, this allows you to mint more)

[pronvis]

I didn't know where bug is - in comment or in code. By default I think code is wrong :)

[ethanfrey]

I made an issue to close this.

As I designed cw20 and wrote most of the implementations, I am pretty clear what was in my head when I wrote the spec and wrote the code which matches it. If I have tested code and it doesn't match the comments, well the tests are the best guide as to what was expected.