Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Starts working on making ERC20 functions compliant and fixing ERC1404. #43

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hickscorp
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

emit Transfer(p.from, p.to, p.amount);
}

return 0;
Copy link
Contributor

@jamesduncombe jamesduncombe Aug 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Clever... using 0 to signify it's ok (1404 spec), then return a specific uint8 for the code if the conditions don't pass. Using dryrun etc to ring fence state changing logic. Nice man 👍. Then you'll use this in dry run mode for detectTransferRestriction (1404)?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're correct - my objective was to allow for a single source of algorythmic truth shared between transfer functions and detectTransferRestriction functions...

@@ -107,7 +135,7 @@ abstract contract AFastFacet is IFastEvents {
* @param b Address b
*/
modifier differentAddresses(address a, address b) {
require(a != b, LibConstants.REQUIRES_DIFFERENT_SENDER_AND_RECIPIENT);
require(a == b, LibConstants.REQUIRES_DIFFERENT_SENDER_AND_RECIPIENT);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

😬

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants