You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Zipped contracts cannot be interacted with via Etherscan. For this, we would have to write a separate wrapper that calls the zip.
Certain features, e.g. address(this), are not compatible with the zipped design. This is not great for us given our protocol's dependency on many runtime features like block.timestamp.
Given the points above, I suggest waiting before using this zipped contract design, i.e., we should let other (simpler) projects pick it up and make it more robust. Also, it isn't audited at the moment.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
@razgraf suggested taking a look at zipped-contracts for potentially reducing the deployment size of our
NFTDescriptor
by up to 50%.After skimming through the README and the launch thread, these are my thoughts and remarks particularly relevant to Sablier:
address(this)
, are not compatible with the zipped design. This is not great for us given our protocol's dependency on many runtime features likeblock.timestamp
.Given the points above, I suggest waiting before using this zipped contract design, i.e., we should let other (simpler) projects pick it up and make it more robust. Also, it isn't audited at the moment.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions