Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: continuous compounding #254

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 11, 2023
Merged

feat: continuous compounding #254

merged 6 commits into from
Aug 11, 2023

Conversation

pakim249CAL
Copy link
Contributor

@pakim249CAL pakim249CAL commented Aug 9, 2023

Fixes #253

The WadMath library from USM is copied over for testing exponentiation. FixedPointMathLib does not come with an e^x wad utility.

MerlinEgalite
MerlinEgalite previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
Jean-Grimal
Jean-Grimal previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
test/forge/Math.t.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
makcandrov
makcandrov previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
Jean-Grimal
Jean-Grimal previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
peyha
peyha previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
MerlinEgalite
MerlinEgalite previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
Jean-Grimal
Jean-Grimal previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
peyha
peyha previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
makcandrov
makcandrov previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@Rubilmax Rubilmax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The code works, but IMO choosing between $(1+r)^n$ or $e^{nr}$ should only be a business-oriented design choice because the gas difference, complexity and security of the code is almost identical

Pls make sure this design is accepted by @PaulFrambot 🙏

@MerlinEgalite
Copy link
Contributor

The code works, but IMO choosing between (1+r)n or enr should only be a business-oriented design choice because the gas difference, complexity and security of the code is almost identical

Pls make sure this design is accepted by @PaulFrambot 🙏

@PaulFrambot is ok with this

@MathisGD MathisGD merged commit 84498d1 into main Aug 11, 2023
4 checks passed
@MathisGD MathisGD deleted the refactor/compound branch August 11, 2023 19:43
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.

Should we compound continuously ?
7 participants