feat(statics): add ofctxlm:yghs OFC counterpart (CECHO-1893) - #9465
Merged
Conversation
Add the missing OFC entry for txlm:yGHS (CECHO-1893 batch 0803), matching the existing ofctxlm:tst precedent. Every other new token in the batch got an OFC counterpart; this one was missed originally. Add ofctxlm:yghs to the ofcTokenNaming test's known-exceptions list, since 'yGHS' is a real external asset ticker (not a BitGo-internal placeholder) and shouldn't be forced to include a 'test' marker, matching the existing usdc/usdt/rlusd/xsgd precedent. Ticket: CECHO-1893 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
rithwik-bitgo
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Every other new token in the CECHO-1893 batch (PR #9457) got an OFC counterpart, but
txlm:yGHSwas missed — I'd assumed testnet Stellar tokens generically don't need one, but that's wrong:ofctxlm:tstalready exists as a precedent for exactly this case (a per-token testnet Stellar OFC entry viatofcStellarToken).Change
ofctxlm:yghsinofcCoins.ts, matching theofctxlm:tstpattern.ofctxlm:yghsto theofcTokenNamingtest's known-exceptions list —yGHSis a real external asset ticker (same category as the existingusdc/usdt/rlusd/xsgdexceptions), so it shouldn't be forced to carry a "test" marker in its display name.Test Plan
tsc --noEmitpasseseslintpassesyarn unit-testinmodules/staticspasses (33,856 tests, up from 33,855 — the newofcTokenNamingcase is covered)Follow-up to: #9457
Ticket: CECHO-1893
🤖 Generated with Claude Code