-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 795
Conversation
Legacy(TransactionRequest), | ||
// 0x01 | ||
#[serde(rename = "0x01")] | ||
Eip2930(Eip2930TransactionRequest), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can I request a rename of these transaction names?
I prefer python's version of "AccessListTransactionRequest" and "DynamicFeeTransactionRequest" over these number named one.
Eip2930 and Eip1559 are not straightforward, it's hard to figure out the underlying meaning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey - we discussed it in the dev chat, I preferred the EIPxxx numbering, confirmed by @prestwich @roynalnaruto @mattsse, so we'll keep the EIPXXX numbering for tx types!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
only checked syntax, not the actual encoding.
use serde::{Deserialize, Serialize}; | ||
/// Parameters for sending a transaction | ||
#[derive(Clone, Default, Serialize, Deserialize, PartialEq, Eq, Debug)] | ||
pub struct Eip1559TransactionRequest { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
pub struct Eip1559TransactionRequest { | |
#[serde(rename_all = "camelCase")] | |
pub struct Eip1559TransactionRequest { |
instead of individual renames?
@guanqun replied above, let's stick with the EIP numbers, they're numbers that everyone in Ethereum knows about (EIP-1559 is very specific about what it gives, vs "Dynamic Fee" can mean literally anything) |
Thanks for the info. I agree that EIP-1559 is popular, but from my own view, other two EIP-2930 and EIP-2718 are less popular. I doubt that people would immediately know the meaning behind them. That said, you have the final call. |
FYI. A few small changes are needed to make it work on goerli network. The biggest one missing here is the leading header byte. I hack around and come up with a patch here, if it's useful to others. guanqun@68de2a2 |
Their APIs had a breaking change
1. The AccessList struct should have used RlpEncodableWrapper, otherwise we get extra bytes 2. The 1559/2930 types do not use eip-155-style replay protection
b4f1790
to
14419d3
Compare
* refactor: move format_token to utils * refactor(cli): use foundry_utils::format_tokens * fix(forge): pretty print counterexample * fix(forge): print string with quotation marks and add brackets * fix(forge): do not set the revert reason if it's empty * chore: cargo fmt / lint
TypedTransaction
enum w/From
implementations for each type, which will replaceTransactionRequest
in the rest of the codebaseAccessList
RLP encoding derivation method