Swap taskers Trident and Legacy

[sarangparikh22]

No description provided.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2621983725

• 5 of 59 (8.47%) changed or added relevant lines in 3 files are covered.
• 3 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-4.08%) to 39.224%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
contracts/utils/MultiCall.sol	5	8	62.5%
contracts/taskers/SushiLegacySwapTasker.sol	0	20	0.0%
contracts/taskers/TridentSwapTasker.sol	0	31	0.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
contracts/utils/BoringBatchable.sol	3	0%

Totals
Change from base Build 2393470904:	-4.08%
Covered Lines:	209
Relevant Lines:	505

---

💛 - Coveralls

[z0r0z]

overall, everything looks good and nice to see standardization with things like multicall @sarangparikh22

nits:

• we can save some gas on stream creation using unchecked {} here,

  furo/contracts/base/FuroStream.sol

  Line 86 in 6c0303c

  streamId = streamIds++;

• we might want to consider using msg.value for amount in cases of address(0) raw ether txs? or is this otherwise enforced

  furo/contracts/base/FuroStream.sol

  Line 82 in 6c0303c

  amount,

• If we embrace payable values, it seems better to not use payable in multicall since this can open up attack vectors,

  furo/contracts/utils/MultiCall.sol

  Line 9 in 6c0303c

  payable

• see: Multicall being payable is seriously dangerous. Uniswap/v3-periphery#52
• consider using higher version of solidity - seaport uses 0.8.14

[sarangparikh22]

overall, everything looks good and nice to see standardization with things like multicall @sarangparikh22

nits:

• we can save some gas on stream creation using unchecked {} here,

  furo/contracts/base/FuroStream.sol

  Line 86 in 6c0303c

  streamId = streamIds++;

• we might want to consider using msg.value for amount in cases of address(0) raw ether txs? or is this otherwise enforced

  furo/contracts/base/FuroStream.sol

  Line 82 in 6c0303c

  amount,

• If we embrace payable values, it seems better to not use payable in multicall since this can open up attack vectors,

  furo/contracts/utils/MultiCall.sol

  Line 9 in 6c0303c

  payable

• see: Multicall being payable is seriously dangerous. Uniswap/v3-periphery#52
• consider using higher version of solidity - seaport uses 0.8.14

1. Yup that's good, I would say let's make that update in the next version, or we can take these updates to a new branch.

2. If you send different values for amounts or msg.value the tx would revert. This is enforced on the BentoBox.

3. Yeah, as we don't use msg.value, we are not prone to it but better to update this in the next version.

[sambacha]

💯