FractionFactory Code Style Findings

FFY-01C: Potentially Misleading Comment

Type	Severity	Location
Code Style		FractionFactory.sol:L177

Description:

The referenced comment implies that the subtraction is safe to execute due to the fact that the FractionFactory::_estimateAndValidateFeesAndApproveDms function will consume the full totalNativeFee amount in external calls with native value attached, however, it fails to accommodate for potential funds that already existed within the FractionFactory.

Example:

Copy
160function _prepareAndDeployOtherChains(
161    DeploymentConfig calldata deploymentConfig,
162    FractionInitializationData memory initData,
163    bytes32 salt,
164    DataPoint dp,
165    address fractionDM,
166    address payable refundAddress
167) private returns (uint256 refund) {
168    bytes memory message = _buildLzSendMessage(salt, initData);
169    (uint256[] memory deployFees, uint256 totalNativeFee) = _estimateAndValidateFeesAndApproveDms(
170        deploymentConfig.chainIds,
171        dp,
172        fractionDM,
173        message,
174        refundAddress
175    );
176    _deployOnOtherChains(deploymentConfig.chainIds, message, refundAddress, deployFees);
177    refund = msg.value - totalNativeFee; // This is safe to do, because if msg.value was not enough we would already fail
178}

Recommendation:

Although the code presently behaves as expected, it should not be wrapped in an unchecked code block given that it might result in an underflow if native funds have been forced within the FractionFactory contract, such as via a selfdestruct of a newly created smart contract.

Alleviation:

The referenced comment has been omitted so as to ensure that the code is never wrapped in an unchecked code block, addressing this exhibit.