Incognito exchange beta version.

[abduraman]

@KingOfCrypto

Meaning that the old one will still be in phone making 3?

No. There will be two apps (Incognito and Staging Incognito) in your phone. While the official one (Incognito) will run pDEX v2 in mainnet (tokens have real value), the other one (Staging Incognito) will run pDEX v3 in “testnet” (tokens have no real value).

[fredlee]

Ooooooo, shiny. Will you be able to add network and run the app connected to a full node that you host yourself?

[abduraman]

@fredlee

Will you be able to add network and run the app connected to a full node that you host yourself?

Unfortunately, not yet. You can select a fullnode just from a predefined set.

[key]

There is so much dead and glaring white space in the screenshots above. How does the dark mode look?

[abduraman]

Here is my initial feedback:

1- To me, Trade and Earn icons are not intuitive. My suggestion for Trade is like classic two-arrow exchange icons ( etc). As for Earn, like dollar bag () or growing tree ( ) or similar.

2- pDEX orders are pure maker orders (see below*), i.e. cannot remove liquidity at all. To incentivize the orders, their trading fees are kept zero. However, the current UI gives an impression of the classical order books in CEX.

*As you see, the orders whose price are 0.03 and 0.04007 do not match in contrast to the situation in the classical order book.

I don’t know how to show the difference. Maybe a message can placed or the button text can be modified instead of using “Sell X” or “Buy X”.

3- Instead of just “ORDER” tab, I think “OPEN ORDERS” and “ORDER HISTORY” tabs would be better.

4- To separate order and trade/swap concepts, “TRADES” or “SWAPS” or “TRADE HISTORY” can be used in SWAP page instead of “ORDER” word and “Trade Detail” instead of “Order Detail”.

5- The trade path can be shown in Advanced part or “Order Detail” part of SWAP page.

Thanks.

[fredlee]

I haven’t had the chance to test the beta version, but is there or will there be a maximum “slippage” percentage for trades, or a clear number and warning? Kind of like the “Price impact” number on Pancakeswap where you see directly that the current pair liquidity cannot satisfy your trade size without affecting the price severely.

You really want to avoid situations like this, The human side of us is what creates a beautiful community! In my opinion the App should not allow this to happen unless you knowingly turn off a risk limiting setting.

[duc]

Thanks everyone for giving this beta version a try, your feedbacks were noted and some of them have been updating.

@abduraman yes, we intentionally made it as simple as possible. FYI those orders would not be matched and filled automatically but that’s an opportunity for swappers/arbitrageurs to take advantage by placing a swap to fill those orders, so in anyway, that situation wouldn’t exist that long I believe.

[KingOfCrypto]

This is reasonable suggestion!

[zes333]

IOS version 50.12 (110)

Swap Trade

Create liquidity

Incognito THANKS!!!

[abduraman]

Hey @Support,

I suspect a wrong trade path choice but I cannot confirm it since I cannot see the trade path. Could you enable showing the chosen trade path?

Thanks.

[cuong]

Hi @abduraman,

Did you create the trade tx? Please send me your trade TxID and your expected value of the trade path, receiving buy token amount, or anything relevant. I will take a look at that.

[abduraman]

In fact, I meant generally but yes, I created a tx.

This one: f04c4af9d57a4f24aadea3e37b0d5927875163919dc7bb0c215bb1e47aa4cc58

Its trade path:

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004-0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b7c-a5c6b413df49be3f91ac1c1bce0347a053cfea2816e2d2cfc355ee8e43b2
45d8,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b115d-30b9cbb5b185e61987a2b072aa217fcd250c0dfdbd510e8b4a8c5096a2fdaf1b,000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b115d-eaedd737e2dd6788d7c7120a9e8337476813df6c59f7cc996789543e7c9f79e8,000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000e776-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-33cac07620c633bb4df3b8c4166f6e22479af4b3a5059d6c2decd090f57bb58e

To my calculation (programmatically calculation, not confirmed manually yet), the path should have been (I took the paths whose lengths are at most 3 into account) :

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b7c-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-4e2b014ea4e9a5c214e61d3d3
1212361d1d7efa6a02354d2e5249c019e4db41b, 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000e776-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-33cac07620c633bb4df3b8c4166f6e22479af4b3a5059d6c2decd090f57bb58e

OR

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b7c-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-4e2b014ea4e9a5c214e61d3d3
1212361d1d7efa6a02354d2e5249c019e4db41b, 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000e776-00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-96b4db72cdd99618183e481041e2ea59e80233a515c9c44d7631cbe3b9ec733f

[cuong]

Let’s go into the detail of the first pool in your trade paths.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000b7c00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000115d7-4e2b014ea4e9a5c214e61d3d3

You are trying to sell 10.000.000.000 of token 0…b7c, so the receiving amount of token 0…115b7 will be about 332.575.455.104 (let ignore the liquidity from the order book because the liquidity of it is too tiny compare with your selling amount).

The real liquidity (297.868.229.709 without amplifying) of token 0…115b7 is insufficient for your trade. That’s why we didn’t suggest that trade path.

TL;DR: The liquidity of pools in your suggested trade path is insufficient.

[abduraman]

Hey @cuong,

I’ve noticed an issue while examining my mistake above. Here are screenshots:

I see the reason. The algorithm is looking for the trade path whose pairs have enough liquidity for the token to be bought but this time it returns so bad result. Am I right? If right, is this a bug? If not so, the users should be educated well.

[cuong]

It’s not a bug.
In this new version of the Incognito exchange. With a specific trade path, there is an upper limit of the sell amount that you can trade. Therefore, it’s no longer the more token you sell, always the more buy amount you get (because it chooses a different trade path). But with the same trade path, if your trade is accepted, you will get a much higher amount of the buying token compared with the old version with constant production formula.

If not so, the users should be educated well.

There will be a price impact index shown in the app for warning users with bad rate trades.

[abduraman]

Hey @Support,

There is a strange issue. My balance is not correct.
Some of my tokens have zero balance, some of them are missing. You may see them from their histories. I also checked them via RPC. What is the problem?

P.S.: I tried clearing cache but no way.

[Jared]

Just to make sure, you tried both Clear Balance Cached and Clear History?

[anirudh.chauhan]

Hello @khanhj

Could you send me some testnet PRV?

Address:
12spE1gSfMdggCq9hUB2gFmQx2u3JFeK2obskHAmJJZm1tnmEaQTufYyTY74vaXS1W2UhynLFvE5EwgJ4VMaCRfji5sVRW7SxJCicUrxJhiQxLgk8BtSnDppw6qtjRkDXuKBjYR7GnWtokL3t4XN

[abduraman]

I also tried Clear History just now. Only PRV balance came back correctly. To check whether the fault is on my side, I have moved all “seen” balance to another account via the app.

[khanhj]

PRV sent