Skip to content

docs(fee-amm): fix rebalancing swap rate direction#2094

Closed
gakonst wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
docs/fix-fee-amm-rate-description
Closed

docs(fee-amm): fix rebalancing swap rate direction#2094
gakonst wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
docs/fix-fee-amm-rate-description

Conversation

@gakonst
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gakonst gakonst commented Jan 15, 2026

Summary

The rebalancing swap rate was incorrectly described as validator token per user token. Since rebalancing swaps go from validatorTokenuserToken, the rate should be expressed as user token per validator token to be consistent with how fee swaps describe their rate (output per input).

Changes

  • Changed rate from 0.9985 to 1.0015 (= 10000/9985)
  • Updated wording from "validator token per user token" to "user token per validator token"

Fixes issue reported in Slack by Tanishk: https://tempoxyz.slack.com/archives/C0A87C21805/p1768504458988599

Add specification for getFeeToken() view function in FeeManager precompile
that allows smart contracts to read the fee token being used for the current
transaction during execution.

This feature was requested by LayerZero/Stargate for their integration with
Tempo's TIP-20 fee system.

Refs: #2085
The rebalancing swap rate was incorrectly described as 'validator token
per user token'. Since rebalancing swaps go from validatorToken to
userToken, the rate should be expressed as 'user token per validator
token' to be consistent with how fee swaps describe their rate
(output per input).

Changed 0.9985 to 1.0015 (= 10000/9985) to reflect the correct ratio.
@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

vercel Bot commented Jan 15, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Review Updated (UTC)
tempo-docs Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jan 15, 2026 7:41pm

Review with Vercel Agent

@jxom
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

jxom commented Jan 20, 2026

Moved to tempoxyz/docs#11

@jxom jxom closed this Jan 20, 2026
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