Add order book documentation #85
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
docs/learn/order-book.md
Outdated
| This function is used to introduce a new order into the market. When traders | ||
| decide to buy or sell an asset, they use `place_order` to specify the details of | ||
| their order, the quantity they wish to buy the `taker_asset` for `taker_amount` | ||
| and sell the `maker_asset` for `maker_amount`. This order is then added to the | ||
| order book, where it waits to be matched by taker(s). | ||
|
|
||
| It is important to mention that the users of the Zeitgeist orderbook do specify | ||
| the price of the assets implicitly. This means that the `place_order` does not | ||
| take a price as an argument, but rather the `taker_amount` and `maker_amount`. | ||
| This means the caller of the `place_order` function does willingly sell the | ||
| `maker_amount` of the `maker_asset` to buy the given `taker_amount` of the | ||
| `taker_asset`. After the execution of `place_order` the `maker_amount` of the | ||
| `maker_asset` is reserved for the order. This means it is not available for the | ||
| user to use in other transactions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be nice to have a formula for the price here.
| trade, transferring the specified asset between parties at the agreed price, and | ||
| update the order book to reflect the completion of the trade. | ||
|
|
||
| The taker has the ability to partially fill the order for a given |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm confused by this description. I think you're confusing maker and taker here. The taker is the one who fills the order, so I'm not quite sure what "This amount specifies the partial amount of what the maker wants to fill." is referring to.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I agree it's confusing. Your sentence "The taker is the one who fills the order" and my sentence is just the perspective of the maker "This amount specifies the partial amount of what the maker wants to fill". But shall we leave this sentence rather out?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What I'm saying is that the sentence "... the maker wants to fill" doesn't really work because the maker doesn't fill orders.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Then it's the maker wants to get filled
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But anyways, I deleted it. Can you approve?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The next sentence also mentions the maker filling an order. ;)
Co-authored-by: Malte Kliemann <[email protected]>
| trade, transferring the specified asset between parties at the agreed price, and | ||
| update the order book to reflect the completion of the trade. | ||
|
|
||
| The taker has the ability to partially fill the order for a given |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The next sentence also mentions the maker filling an order. ;)
Co-authored-by: Malte Kliemann <[email protected]>
No description provided.