Reset fill history when editing partially filled orders - #690
Conversation
|
@fatemeh-i, could you review this two-file partial-fill → edit → IOC regression/fix when you have a chance? |
|
@Taz33m Thank you so much for creating this PR and for all your help and contributions to the project. We really appreciate your support! As you can see in [PR #693](#693) (Fix/order acceptance consistency), we are currently working on refactoring the Our business team has suggested that, from a user-experience perspective, exchanges should use a cancel + create new order flow instead of editing an existing order. We are still discussing and evaluating this decision with the team. Once we finalize the decision, if we decide to keep the edit functionality, we will definitely apply your PR as well. Thanks again for taking the time to identify this issue, add a regression test, and provide the fix. We really appreciate it! |
|
Thanks for the context—that makes sense. If |
Fixes the matching-semantic part of #688. The separate performance observations in that issue are intentionally out of scope here.
What changed
filledQuantitywhen an edit rebuilds an order through the existing cancel-and-reinsert path.Before the fix, the edited order carried the old fill count of 4 and exposed only 2 units. Against the original line, the new test fails with
expected: <0> but was: <4>; with the fix, the requested 6 units rest and fill.Verification
Result: 18 passed, 0 failed under Java 17.