Remove supply from Token

[jackcmay]

• Tracking total supply may be misinterpreted and lead to confusion If accounts are removed due to rent delinquency.
• Removing supply reduces a required key in the Burn instruction

[jstarry]

If the pool is measured solely on token a, then I think fees could only accumulate in token b's balance

[jackcmay]

Hehe, yup, I threw this up late last night when I got to that point to garner input, looks like it worked 😁

…

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020, 7:46 AM Justin Starry ***@***.***> wrote: If the pool is measured solely on token a, then I think fees could only accumulate in token b's balance — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#82 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJSLY6SEJWC52Y4ZFUHLVILR2MYLLANCNFSM4OSRJUJA> .

[jstarry]

Hehe, I'm just catching up to all the awesome work you've been doing!

[jackcmay]

Looks like the swap math might be off and I don't think token-swap needs supply, there are other ways to track it (like swap tracks it itself). More work to do on token-swap. Any objections to removing supply from the Token program?