IMPERSONATECALL opcode EIP #2997
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lightclient
requested changes
Sep 25, 2020
|
I'll improve it based on the comments! |
Co-authored-by: lightclient <14004106+lightclient@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: lightclient <14004106+lightclient@users.noreply.github.com>
|
I saw that https://ethereum-magicians.org/ is more frequently used to discuss EIPs than https://ethresear.ch/. Should I move the discussion there? It better or worse to open two threads for discussion ? |
|
|
MicahZoltu
suggested changes
Sep 30, 2020
EIPS/eip-2997.md
Outdated
Comment on lines
62
to
65
| ## Possible arguments against | ||
|
|
||
| * You can replicate this functionality with counterfactual contract creation. We argue that the there is an important benefit of avoiding the deployment cost in case the sponsor needs to serve thousands of users. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
EIPs are not the appropriate place to make arguments/pleas. Consider moving this content to the motivation section and re-wording it as a motivation.
EIPS/eip-2997.md
Outdated
Comment on lines
61
to
65
|
|
||
| ## Possible arguments against | ||
|
|
||
| * You can replicate this functionality with counterfactual contract creation. We argue that the there is an important benefit of avoiding the deployment cost in case the sponsor needs to serve thousands of users. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| ## Possible arguments against | |
| * You can replicate this functionality with counterfactual contract creation. We argue that the there is an important benefit of avoiding the deployment cost in case the sponsor needs to serve thousands of users. |
Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
MicahZoltu
approved these changes
Oct 8, 2020
| This proposal enables native multi-user wallets (wallets that serve multiple users) that can be commanded by EIP-712 based messages and therefore enable meta-transactions. Multi-user wallets also enable the aggregation of transfer operations in batches similar to rollups, but maintaining the same address space as normal onchain transactions, so the sender's wallet does not need to be upgraded to support sinding ether or tokens to a user of a multi-user wallet. | ||
| Additionally, many times a sponsor company wants to deploy non-custodial smart wallets for all its users. The sponsor does not want to pay the deployment cost of each user contract in advance. Counterfactual contract creation enables this, yet it forces the sponsor to create the smart wallet (or a proxy contract to it) when the user wants to transfer ether or tokens out of his/her account for the first time. This proposal avoids this extra cost, which is at least 42000 gas per user. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
Style consistency.
tkstanczak
pushed a commit
to tkstanczak/EIPs
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2020
IMPERSONATECALL Opcode
Arachnid
pushed a commit
to Arachnid/EIPs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2021
IMPERSONATECALL Opcode
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proposal for IMPERSONATECALL. Open discussions are held in https://ethresear.ch/t/impersonatecall-opcode/8020 .