Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

List of Features I Think Should Be Considered #833

Open
Zer0dot opened this issue Mar 16, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

List of Features I Think Should Be Considered #833

Zer0dot opened this issue Mar 16, 2023 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Zer0dot
Copy link
Contributor

Zer0dot commented Mar 16, 2023

Hey, having worked on some stuff interfacing with Aave V3, I've come up with a few feature requests that I'd like to bring up, for potential future inclusion.

  1. Token getters
    • Currently the only way to fetch the a/debt tokens relies on fetching the entire reserve data struct, if possible, streamlining getters to reduce the amount of unnecessary storage reads would help.
  2. Meta-tx flashloans
    • Ok, I know what you're thinking, in what context would this ever be useful? Well, take for example liquidity migrations, or debt swaps, etc. Being able to initiate a flashloan on behalf of a given signer would be great, while passing the initiator as that signer. Though this can be circumvented with custom flashloan recipients that assert either msg.sender == initiator or relayer == initiator, this logic would be convoluted (requiring different data decoding) and application-specific. I think it's worth considering a meta-tx variant.
  3. Return minted aToken amounts on supply actions
    • As rounding can cause minted aToken amounts to vary slightly (by factors of wei), the assertion that aToken mints are always 1-to-1 is not valid. This isn't an issue for top-level users, but it can be an issue for contracts interfacing with the protocol who need to keep track of minted aToken balances. The alternative would be tracking scaled balances in the interfacing contracts, but this is likely to be less gas efficient due to needing to fetch the index as well.

Anyway, these are just some features from the top of my head. Let me know what you folks think!

@Zer0dot Zer0dot added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 16, 2023
@Zer0dot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Zer0dot commented Apr 18, 2023

  1. Flashloan passing additional rateMode context
    • Currently the executeOperation() callback does not pass any context about the specified ratemode for each asset. This can cause headaches when it comes to flashloan receivers that may need to act differently depending on whether the asset(s) loaned is(are) debt-bearing or not, or potentially variable/stable debt.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant