Skip to content

[WIP] Solidity Implementation of mvs_manager.cairo#19

Closed
Copilot wants to merge 1 commit intoupgrade/scarb-2.11.4from
copilot/fix-c865ccb9-b169-4cb1-8261-d528a43a3197
Closed

[WIP] Solidity Implementation of mvs_manager.cairo#19
Copilot wants to merge 1 commit intoupgrade/scarb-2.11.4from
copilot/fix-c865ccb9-b169-4cb1-8261-d528a43a3197

Conversation

Copy link

Copilot AI commented Aug 2, 2025

Coding agent has begun work on Solidity Implementation of mvs_manager.cairo and will replace this description as work progresses.

See problem context

TITLE: Solidity Implementation of mvs_manager.cairo

USER INTENT: The user aims to create a Solidity version of the mvs_manager.cairo file, ensuring it supports multiple extensions and adheres to specific functionality and compatibility requirements.

TASK DESCRIPTION: The user requires the development of a Solidity contract located in solidity/src that functions as an ERC4626 compatible vault. This contract should manage multiple extensions, such as LeverageVault.sol, and implement a rebalance function for asset management. The total assets should be calculated as the balance of the manager contract plus the total assets of each extension, all denominated in the manager's asset. The rebalance function should be an admin-only operation that allows for configurable push/pull operations based on a combination ID.

EXISTING: The user has provided a clear specification for the Solidity implementation but has not yet shared any existing code or files related to the mvs_manager.cairo or its extensions.

PENDING: The user needs the Solidity version of mvs_manager.cairo to be created, including the implementation of the ERC4626 compatibility, total asset calculation, and the rebalance function with configurable operations.

CODE STATE: No specific code snippets or files have been discussed or modified yet, as the user is in the initial stages of outlining the requirements.

RELEVANT CODE/DOCUMENTATION SNIPPETS: No code snippets have been provided yet, as the user has only outlined the requirements for the new Solidity implementation.

OTHER NOTES: The user emphasizes the importance of flexibility in the rebalance function, indicating that operations should not be hardcoded but rather configurable through a combination ID. This suggests a need for a robust design that allows for future extensibility and customization.

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.

2 participants