Info
Source on GitHub
Smart Contract Address
0QBUuvmPEHyFCJHiIUORt96vKXsbFnn4q-2Al63TUdw7S2LT
Source on GitHub
Smart Contract Address
0QCgqx2qngtLwY9T07J4Nh-UNO8FGSnQ_tP4sgoxZEVfu-56
Testing and Issues
You can test this entry and submit issues during the testing period of the Blockchain Contest, Stage 2 contest.
Entries with serious issues will not be able to win the contest, but even minor issues might be important for overall results.
Voting
Comments
by rating
Issues
Regarding goods ecosystem.
In general paying for any of-chain work requires guarantees for buyer in case seller misbehaves. I'm aware of only a single algorithm that solves this problem. It locks both parties funds, giving buyer an option to burn them in case seller misbehaves.
I fail to see anything like that in your contracts. If buyer pays for estimation and seller either does not provide a response, or provides a rubbish response then there is no way for buyer to punish that.
In general paying for any of-chain work requires guarantees for buyer in case seller misbehaves. I'm aware of only a single algorithm that solves this problem. It locks both parties funds, giving buyer an option to burn them in case seller misbehaves.
I fail to see anything like that in your contracts. If buyer pays for estimation and seller either does not provide a response, or provides a rubbish response then there is no way for buyer to punish that.
You assume that query_id provided by buyer is unique. Buyer can send another internal message replacing his order, and subsequent price response external message will respond to the new query (thinking it was old one). You only check expiration there, everything else is pulled from external message. So this isn't much.
Great submission in terms of efforts, however I do not believe school register and hardly believe goods project will have any application in TON ecosystem in future.
Nobody added any issues yet...