Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
test(token-list): test coverage
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@n1c01a5
n1c01a5 committed Mar 5, 2019
1 parent ba18d22 commit 2d9ce73
Showing 1 changed file with 155 additions and 10 deletions.
165 changes: 155 additions & 10 deletions test/arbitrable-token-list.js
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {
const governor = accounts[0]
const partyA = accounts[2]
const partyB = accounts[8]
const arbitratorExtraData = 0x08575
const arbitratorExtraData = 0x0
const baseDeposit = 10 ** 10
const arbitrationCost = 1000
const sharedStakeMultiplier = 10000
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -59,15 +59,19 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {
from: governor
}
)

await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.changeArbitrator(
enhancedAppealableArbitrator.address
)
}

const deployArbitrableTokenList = async arbitrator => {
arbitrableTokenList = await ArbitrableTokenList.new(
arbitrator.address, // arbitrator
arbitrator.address,
arbitratorExtraData,
registrationMetaEvidence,
clearingMetaEvidence,
governor, // governor
governor,
baseDeposit,
baseDeposit,
challengePeriodDuration,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -261,16 +265,21 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {
'Must be disputed'
)

// TODO: check if the dispute exists on the arbitrator

assert.equal(
token1[4].toNumber(),
TOKEN_STATUS.RegistrationRequested,
'Must be `RegistrationRequested` as token status'
)
})
})

describe('dispute flow', () => {
beforeEach(async () => {
await deployArbitrators()
await deployArbitrableTokenList(enhancedAppealableArbitrator)
})

it('should execute request, create a dispute and the challenger wins the dispute', async () => {
it('should execute request, create a dispute and the challenger wins the dispute (absent)', async () => {
const tx1 = await arbitrableTokenList.requestStatusChange(
'Pinakion2',
'PNK2',
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -345,8 +354,6 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {
'Must be disputed'
)

// TODO: check if the dispute exists on the arbitrator

assert.equal(
token1[4].toNumber(),
TOKEN_STATUS.RegistrationRequested,
Expand All @@ -355,8 +362,8 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {

assert.equal(
await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.arbitrator(),
governor,
'Must be the arbitrator address.'
enhancedAppealableArbitrator.address,
'Must be the `enhancedAppealableArbitrator` contract address.'
)

assert.equal(
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -402,6 +409,144 @@ contract('ArbitrableTokenList', function(accounts) {
'Must be `Absent` as token status'
)
})

it('should execute request, create a dispute and the requester wins the dispute (registered)', async () => {
const tx1 = await arbitrableTokenList.requestStatusChange(
'Pinakion2',
'PNK2',
0x1,
'BcdwnVkEp8Nn41U2homNwyiVWYmPsXxEdxCUBn9V8y5AvqQaDwadDkQmwEWoyWgZxYnKsFPNauPhawDkME1nFNQbCu',
{
from: partyA, // Requester
value:
baseDeposit +
arbitrationCost +
(sharedStakeMultiplier * arbitrationCost) / 10000
}
)

tokenID1 = tx1.logs[1].args._tokenID

await arbitrableTokenList.challengeRequest(
tokenID1,
'evidence_tokenID1',
{
from: partyB, // Challenger
value:
arbitrationCost +
(sharedStakeMultiplier * arbitrationCost) / 10000 +
baseDeposit
}
)

// Give a ruling in favor the challenger
await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.giveRuling(
0,
1, // Requester wins the dispute
{ from: governor }
)

await increaseTime(appealPeriodDuration + 1)

// NOTE: note need to be call twice
await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.giveRuling(
0,
1, // Requester wins the dispute
{ from: governor }
)

token1 = await arbitrableTokenList.getTokenInfo(tokenID1)

assert.equal(
token1[4].toNumber(),
TOKEN_STATUS.Registered,
'Must be `Registered` as token status'
)
})

it('should execute request, raise a dispute, the requester wins the dispute (`RegistrationRequested`), do a appeal and challenger wins (`Absent`)', async () => {
const tx1 = await arbitrableTokenList.requestStatusChange(
'Pinakion2',
'PNK2',
0x1,
'BcdwnVkEp8Nn41U2homNwyiVWYmPsXxEdxCUBn9V8y5AvqQaDwadDkQmwEWoyWgZxYnKsFPNauPhawDkME1nFNQbCu',
{
from: partyA, // Requester
value:
baseDeposit +
arbitrationCost +
(sharedStakeMultiplier * arbitrationCost) / 10000
}
)
tokenID1 = tx1.logs[1].args._tokenID

await arbitrableTokenList.challengeRequest(
tokenID1,
'evidence_tokenID1',
{
from: partyB, // Challenger
value:
arbitrationCost +
(sharedStakeMultiplier * arbitrationCost) / 10000 +
baseDeposit
}
)

let token1 = await arbitrableTokenList.getTokenInfo(tokenID1)

// Give a ruling in favor the requester
await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.giveRuling(
0,
1, // Requester wins the dispute
{ from: governor }
)

token1 = await arbitrableTokenList.getTokenInfo(tokenID1)

assert(
token1[4].toNumber(),
TOKEN_STATUS.RegistrationRequested,
'Must be the `RegistrationRequested`'
)

const appealCost = (await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.appealCost(
0,
0x00
)).toNumber()

const loserRequiredStake =
(loserStakeMultiplier * appealCost) / MULTIPLIER_DIVISOR
let round = await arbitrableTokenList.getRoundInfo(tokenID1, 0, 1)

await arbitrableTokenList.fundAppeal(
tokenID1,
2, // Challenger
{
from: partyB,
value: appealCost + loserRequiredStake
}
)

await increaseTime(appealPeriodDuration + 1)

await enhancedAppealableArbitrator.giveRuling(
0,
2, // Chanllenger wins the dispute
{ from: governor }
)

token1 = await arbitrableTokenList.getTokenInfo(tokenID1)

request = await arbitrableTokenList.getRequestInfo(tokenID1, 0)
round = await arbitrableTokenList.getRoundInfo(tokenID1, 0, 1)
assert.isFalse(round[0])

assert.equal(
token1[4].toNumber(),
TOKEN_STATUS.Absent,
'Must be `Absent` as token status'
)
})
})

describe('multiple registration requests', () => {
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 2d9ce73

Please sign in to comment.