feat: impl constructor

[noa-starkware]

This change is 

[remollemo]

@remollemo reviewed 1 of 5 files at r1.
Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 14 at r1 (raw file):

        usdc_e_token: ContractAddress,
        /// New USDC token address.
        usdc_token: ContractAddress,

i'd treat them (and name them) as new_token (native) and legacy_token

Suggestion:

        /// The phased out token being swapped for the new one.
        legacy_token: ContractAddress,
        /// The new token swapping the legacy one.
        new_token: ContractAddress,

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 16 at r1 (raw file):

        usdc_token: ContractAddress,
        /// Address in L1 that gets the USDC.e.
        owner_l1_address: ContractAddress,

1. There is no L1 owner. it doesn't own a thing in this contract.
2. The L1 address is the target fo the funds clearance. name it accordingly. e.g. - l1_recipient if you insist - you can call it l1_fund_owner
3. if it's an L1 address the type should be EthAddress and not ContractAddress

Suggestion:

        /// Ethereum address to which the legacy token is bridged.
        l1_fund_owner: ContractAddress,

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 32 at r1 (raw file):

        usdc_token: ContractAddress,
        owner_l1_address: ContractAddress,
        owner_l2_address: ContractAddress,

we also need ther SG bridge address here.

[noa-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 14 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, remollemo wrote…

i'd treat them (and name them) as new_token (native) and legacy_token

Done.

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 16 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, remollemo wrote…

1. There is no L1 owner. it doesn't own a thing in this contract.
2. The L1 address is the target fo the funds clearance. name it accordingly. e.g. - l1_recipient if you insist - you can call it l1_fund_owner
3. if it's an L1 address the type should be EthAddress and not ContractAddress

Done.

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 32 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, remollemo wrote…

we also need ther SG bridge address here.

Done.

[arad-starkware]

• feat: send legacy balance to L1 #17
• feat: migrate function implementation #16
• feat: impl constructor #7 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_usdc_migration.cairo line 30 at r2 (raw file):

    );
    // Assert infinite approval to owner_l2_address for both USDC.e and USDC.
    let legacy_dispacther = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: cfg.legacy_token };

dispatcher

Code quote:

dispacther

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_usdc_migration.cairo line 31 at r2 (raw file):

    // Assert infinite approval to owner_l2_address for both USDC.e and USDC.
    let legacy_dispacther = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: cfg.legacy_token };
    let native_dispacther = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: cfg.native_token };

same

Code quote:

dispacther

[remollemo]

Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 16 at r2 (raw file):

        /// The new token swapping the legacy one.
        // TODO: Consider change to dispatcher.
        native_token: ContractAddress,

1. don't change to dispatcher. IMO, but it can work that way too.
2. native is too specific imo. wheres legacy vs. new is tighter with what really we do, and more generic.

Suggestion:

        new_token: ContractAddress,

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 48 at r2 (raw file):

        let native_dispacther = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: native_token };
        legacy_dispacther.approve(spender: owner_l2_address, amount: MAX_U256);
        native_dispacther.approve(spender: owner_l2_address, amount: MAX_U256);

inline it.

Suggestion:

        IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: legacy_token }.approve(spender: owner_l2_address, amount: MAX_U256);
        IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: native_token }.approve(spender: owner_l2_address, amount: MAX_U256);

[noa-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 16 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, remollemo wrote…

1. don't change to dispatcher. IMO, but it can work that way too.
2. native is too specific imo. wheres legacy vs. new is tighter with what really we do, and more generic.

We only use it as dispatcher, so why not change to dispatcher here?

[noa-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 5 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_usdc_migration.cairo line 30 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, arad-starkware wrote…

dispatcher

Done.

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_usdc_migration.cairo line 31 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, arad-starkware wrote…

same

Done.

[arad-starkware]

@arad-starkware reviewed 2 of 5 files at r1, 3 of 3 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 20 at r4 (raw file):

        owner_l2_address: ContractAddress,
        /// Token bridge address.
        starkgate_address: ContractAddress,

dispatcher as well?

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 20 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, arad-starkware wrote…

dispatcher as well?

You don't have the dispatcher here, I'll add it in a different PR, remove this

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware and @remollemo)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_utils.cairo line 19 at r4 (raw file):

    use starknet::{ContractAddress, EthAddress};

    pub const INITIAL_SUPPLY: u256 = 1000000000000000000000000000;

use pow? it's unclear what number this is...

[remollemo]

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware and @noa-starkware)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 16 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, noa-starkware wrote…

We only use it as dispatcher, so why not change to dispatcher here?

we can. i just don't like storing non-premitive types. but that is not a good reason not to.

[noa-starkware]

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 20 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, arad-starkware wrote…

You don't have the dispatcher here, I'll add it in a different PR, remove this

Change it to dispatcher in your pr if you want to

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_utils.cairo line 19 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, arad-starkware wrote…

use pow? it's unclear what number this is...

What number do we want here?

[remollemo]

@remollemo reviewed 1 of 5 files at r1, 1 of 3 files at r3, 2 of 2 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @arad-starkware)

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware)

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/usdc_migration.cairo line 20 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, noa-starkware wrote…

Change it to dispatcher in your pr if you want to

I will, but why add it here if you don't use it, and it will be overwritten?

---

packages/usdc_migration/src/tests/test_utils.cairo line 19 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, noa-starkware wrote…

What number do we want here?

we can make it the entire USDC.e supply, ~140M, so 140 * million * decimals or 14 * 10 million * decimals or just 14 * 10^12
but my point is i think it should be clearer what number this is (i.e. how many zeros)

[arad-starkware]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noa-starkware)