Suggestion form audit: Unnecessary complication due to transferPrice parameter to AuctionOffering.finalize about name-bazaar HOT 3 CLOSED

@madvas , there is a usecase: "If user has bid before, it's enough for him to send only difference needed for next bid." . Is this situation handled correctly by UI, like, does it have an information what amount is sufficient for user to place his next bid? Maybe some kind of event should be fired to distinguish these two situations, when funds were transfered successfully, and when they were not, in order to maintain syncronisation with the cache db?

from name-bazaar.

@wambat Good point. It is more n less handled in UI, but you know what, let's ditch all this reusing of pending returns. It's unnecessary complicating things. Nick suggested it also.
So amount in pending returns is never used for next bid. Not even in self overbidding. The amount user sends is the amount of bid, no special tricks. If user tries to overbid himself, simply contract will try to send him previous bid back, if that fails, adds it into pending returns.

from name-bazaar.

cache db doesn't really need to know about whether funds were transferred or sticking in pending returns. It's not relevant for search. And UI is listening to any changes to offering and reloads whole offering if anything changes, including user's pending returns, so that's ok too.

from name-bazaar.