Migration to wagmi v1 and viem

[technophile-04]

Plan of action :

• Migrate all the easy files ( File not using ethers / not deeply dependent on wagmi )

• Migrate main file ( Deeply dependent on ethers and wagmi )

  • Work in Progress
    • useTransactor (@technophile-04 )
    • useScaffoldContractWrite (@sverps)
    • ContractUI (@sverps)
    • useScaffoldEventHistory (@sverps)
    • useBurnerWallet & BunerConnector inline with new Connector like getWalletClient instead of getSigner etc (@technophile-04)
    • useScaffoldEventSubscriber (@sverps)
    • Fix decodeTxData.ts (@technophile-04 )
    • blockexplorer all routes (@technophile-04)
    • fetchPriceFromUniswap.ts

• Lastly remove ethers as dependencies from nextjs workspace

  • Some places like @uniswap/sdk still rely on ethers provider

Bugs Iteration :

Work In progress :

• useContractWrite not working with burner without prepare hook check -> Migration to wagmi v1 and viem #352 (comment)
• The code was always shown on blockexplorer/address/${address} fixed at 8f07140
• Fix AddressInput while using useState("")
• Grabbing funds from the faucet breaks the UI checkout Migration to wagmi v1 and viem #352 (comment) for more details ( @technophile-04, @sverps )
• Decimals break the UI while sending txn in debug page checkout Migration to wagmi v1 and viem #352 (comment) for more desc (@sverps )

Notes :

The viem migration guide and wagmi migration guide are pretty robust and nice

But here is the main difference between ethers and viem :

• In viem instead of providers / signers we have clients, so there are total 3 types of client
  • Public client
  • Wallet client
  • Test client
• Each client can be used to call different rpc methods( viem likes to call them actions )
• Example Public client can be used to call Public actions ( rpc calls ) like eth_blockNumber etc
• Example Wallet client can be used to call Wallet actions ( rpc calls ) like eth_sendTransaction etc (There is no concept of Signer instead it calls the Accounts)

Additional Information

• I have read the contributing docs (if this is your first contribution)
• This is not a duplicate of any existing pull request

Related Issues

Fixes #229

Your ENS/address: shivbhonde.eth , solidixen.eth

[sverps]

I started with updating useScaffoldContractWrite. A question: I recall a discussion about the recklesslyUnprepared mode and not using usePrepareContractWrite, does anyone remember what was up with that?

[technophile-04]

I recall a discussion about the recklesslyUnprepared mode and not using usePrepareContractWrite, does anyone remember what was up with that?

#215 has the reason why it was removed, but were planning to add it again in #269 due to #216 (comment)

---

But in wagmi v1 its not mandatory also :

Also, they removed have removed the problem mentioned in #216 (comment) from https://wagmi.sh/react/prepare-hooks page

So I think we won't be needing #269 since the issue can be resolved without using Prepare Hooks in v1 🙌

[technophile-04]

Update :

1. update parsing of error and small formatting tweak at fcb9703 :

Before V1	After

2. Got back the similar behaviour to main when values are too big they are shown as Ξ 2.1 etc cf63271

3. There was a bug when you send small value like 1 wei its was used to send 49 wei fixed at d76328c

4. Also fixed some todos

BUG's Noticed :

1. bug: autoConnect is not working  #391

2. Handling passing of array / structs of inputs :

We have this logic in main

      if (["array", "tuple"].includes(baseTypeOfArg)) 

But it seems now viem / wagmi does like to parse it as :

We can maybe check if there includes [ then its an array 🤔 need to think about it, will have a look at it tomorrow

Here is the example contract to test it out -> 1f22545 (look at previous changes)

[technophile-04]

@sverps could you please check for 1f46ed9 .....It tries to remove the need for assertion since it was giving errors when a contract is not present

Lol it's bit hacky but please feel free to update it 🙌

[sverps]

@sverps could you please check for 1f46ed9 .....It tries to remove the need for assertion since it was giving errors when a contract is not present

Lol it's bit hacky but please feel free to update it 🙌

Cleaned it up a bit. I also found a very nice utility type Prettify. Will go through the types to see where we could use it to provide nicer types for devs. (Check the resulting type also after removing the Prettify<...> wrapper if you want to see what it does)

[technophile-04]

also found a very nice utility type Prettify. Will go through the types to see where we could use it to provide nicer types for devs.

Omg love this, great find !! Such a great utility always had a hard time seeing just the Abstract type name instead of the resultant type, Yes we should it update wherever possible

[technophile-04]

Fixed some bugs and clean up starting from 9ab3636... Also tested all the things nicely and everything seems to work as main

Marking this Ready for review since everything looks cool now 🙌

We have just 2 todo's (can be conqured async with testing) :

1. bug: autoConnect is not working  #391
2. Using Prettify for better types hint as mentioned in Migration to wagmi v1 and viem #352 (comment)

[carletex]

I'm live testing & debugging with @technophile-04 at ETH Barcelona 🤓

We notices that there was an error when inputting decimals on the tx value field (Interger Input). It was because an uncomplete decimal can't be converted to BigInit. Pushed a fix

[carletex]

We think the main stuff looks great (maybe some bugs will come up), so let's merge!!!

Really nice work @technophile-04 & @sverps