Closed LuizAsFight closed 2 months ago
I think the more permanent fix for this should involve fuel-core
determining what the correct response is based on https://github.com/FuelLabs/fuel-core/issues/1941
In the interim we have released a patch which solves this.
@maschad makes sense to close this issue? the bug in this issue is fixed.
the change on VM may or may not happen haha, can it be tracked in another issue as an improvement
instead of a bug
?
cc @arboleya
I agree @LuizAsFight this particular issue closed since both
have been created to address this on our end going forward, if https://github.com/FuelLabs/fuel-core/issues/1941 gets integrated on fuel-core
then we can create another issue to make accommodations for that.
What version of fuels-ts are you using?
0.88.1
Steps to Reproduce
increment
buttonMore details
The screen above tries to show the operations of the transaction for the user to check and confirm it. It's currently showing no operations.
Behind the scenes it's consuming
getTransactionSummary
. When this method tries to compute the contract call operations, it tries to identify who called the contract using the assetId returned from the receipt.The problem is that the receipt returns
0x0000...
, as there was no assetId in the contract call made. The previous code was working only because the baseAssetId was the same, and the input would have the correct assetId.Solution
When the receipt returns
assetId: 0x0000...
, consider getting the input that has the currentbaseAssetId
, meaning that who payed the fee will be identified as the contract caller.fuel-core https://github.com/FuelLabs/fuel-core/issues/1941
I think this is something that could be changed in the VM, it could return
null
instead of0x0000...
, but it doesn't change the solution above