Clément Lesaege
Clément Lesaege
I also get the same issue.
Hi Jordy, The backward compatibility issue is not about the UI which can be updated. But about a smart contract owning tokens and making an approval (approval reverting could stuck...
Yes, because at some point the standard was advising to do so. See this commit https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/commit/7e6905c221cf59067f9e1727026155fcf0f0efb1#diff-c846f31381e26d8beeeae24afcdf4e3e After discussions, it was decided that it was breaking backward compatibility (and not providing...
Well contrary to what I said below, according to the RFC: http://www.rfc-base.org/txt/rfc-2119.txt > SHOULD NOT This phrase, or the phrase "NOT RECOMMENDED" mean that > there may exist valid reasons...
By the way, for now it seems we have to use bytes (or do some ugly stuff with the ABI), but we may get something cleaner and backward compatible when...
For now, we'll have to make some sort of "hack", we can come back to standardizing when the required tools will be developed in solidity.
As discussed in the slack, we can make a standard even without any hack. > "Call Function of Contract with Args when calling it would not revert". > We could...
I warned Zack about it. They may have abandoned the project.
No answer, the project seems to be dead, let's not rely on it.
Hi @dburghelea , Yes, we are considering both the liquidity and opt-in system. - For the liquidity, we would use some exchange protocol like 0x or a bonded curve. -...