feat: updated paginated deposits table #909
Conversation
ACX-1623 Implement new consistent transactions table components
Should be generic and reusable for /transactions, /referrals and /op-rebates pages. Only implement via Storybook |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
| Math.abs( | ||
| DateTime.fromSeconds(deposit.depositTime).diffNow("seconds").as("seconds") | ||
| ) > MAX_PENDING_STATE_TIME_UNTIL_SLOW; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we allow any instance of future deposits to show in the FE? We avoid this in the relayer/SDK
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you explain what future deposits are?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Deposits whose time occurs in the future - so when DateTime.fromSeconds(deposit.depositTime).diffNow("seconds").as("seconds") is negative
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Scraper derives the deposit date from the block timestamp of the deposit tx. So there shouldn't be cases of future deposits, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something to note here is that diffNow uses the formula
DATE_ARG - NOW
i.e. if the passed-in date is in the past then it is negative. That's why I am using Math.abs here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah I see, if we would never see future deposits, is the Math.abs(...) on the diff just for convenience?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the deposit timestamp is in the past diffNow always returns a negative number actually. Because it uses
depositTime - nowTime
That's why I need that Math.abs
dohaki
force-pushed
the
new-deposits-table
branch
from
fba48dc to
741f556
Compare
dohaki
force-pushed
the
new-paginated-deposits-table
branch
from
17fd21e to
2b3381f
Compare
dohaki
force-pushed
the
new-paginated-deposits-table
branch
from
2b3381f to
3604c25
Compare
Add a paginated variant of the new deposits table. Also only testable via Storybook.
Closes ACX-1623