feat: send tx by type

[nachomazzara]

Ability to send transaction by type when there is an overloading with function names

Usage

Send Call

const balance = await MANAFacade.balanceOf(
  account
)

// Or
const balance = await MANAFacade.sendCallByType('balanceOf', 'address', account)

// Or
const balance = await MANAFacade.balanceOf['address'](
  account
)

Send Transaction

const balance = await MANAFacade.mint(
  account, 
  amount
)

// Or
const balance = await MANAFacade.sendTransactionByType(
  'mint', 
  'address,uint256', 
  account, 
  amount
)

// Or
const balance = await MANAFacade.mint['address,uint256']( 
  account, 
  amount
)

Note

Also added Marketplace-Contract ABI with overloaded events

[menduz]

please add test

[nachomazzara]

please add test

That's why it is WIP

[menduz]

🔥

[nachomazzara]

@menduz @NicoSantangelo test added!

[menduz]

Looks good. But

I'm starting feeling we should not add any other method to Contract.ts and instead start creating functions that receive the contract. Like

await eth.callContract(ContractInstance, 'balanceOf', address)
await ContractInstance.balanceOf(address) // keep some overload in the contract

await eth.sendContractTransaction(ContractInstance, 'mint', address, amount)
await eth.sendContractTransaction(ContractInstance, 'mint', 'address,uint256', address, amount)
await ContractInstance.mint(address, amount) // keep some overload in the contract

I'm also in doubt about which overload should be the default in the contract. Lets assume we have

contract X {
  mint(a: address, b: uint256) {...}
  mint(a: address) {...}
}

Then we have the

function callMint(){
   await XInstance.mint.apply(...arguments)
}

• What mint are we chosing?
• Is that choice stable?
• Does it depends on the compiler?
• Does it depend on the JSON parser?
• According to JSON the order of the keys in a object does not matter and if it is honored it is only an implementation detail of the browsers. [citation pending]
• Will the solidity JSON ABI be emited consistently in every release?

[nachomazzara]

@menduz thanks for the review!

• What mint are we choosing? I: It will get the first in the ABI

• Is that choice stable? I: No, but you will use sendCallByType or sendTransactionByType if you see the ABI with an overloaded method to execute the desired one. The main goal with those ...ByType is to don't care about the order. We can remove the name method and only keep byType methods when there is an overload. I mean, if we have the mint method overloaded. We can remove contract.mint() and only support contract.sendTransactionByType('mint', 'type1') and contract.sendCallByType('mint', 'type2')

• Will the solidity JSON ABI be emitted consistently in every release? I: The order of the overloaded method should keep consistent between versions

Context about the usage.

We support the legacy methods for the marketplace-contract which has the same name but different parameters.

E.g:

// Cancel Order
function cancelOrder(address nftAddress, uint256 assetId);

// Cancel Order Legacy
function cancelOrder(uint256 assetId);

Nowadays is not a problem because we can manipulate the ABI and remove the legacy methods cause at the marketplace Dapp we don't need the legacy ones, but would be great to stop removing methods from ABI and select the method from our Dapps by type