Closed axic closed 6 years ago
Wouldn't this be a function of deployment? Couldn't the contract just as easily take that value in as a constructor parameter? This would be my preference as it wouldn't require preprocessing or any other tricks.
On Feb 5, 2017 2:22 PM, "Alex Beregszaszi" notifications@github.com wrote:
For example the following contract uses an external variable:
contract A { function tokenName() returns (string) { return globals("TOKEN_NAME"); } }
That variable could be defined in the package configuration. Would that make any sense for ethpm?
For more details see: ethereum/solidity#1650 https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/issues/1650
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFp1ZZoK8qpWcT-WcCUF1p65Km7V6K5ks5rZkuRgaJpZM4L3pn9 .
@tcoulter there is no preprocessing needed, it is a compiler feature, it is only about passing these variables in a given format to the compiler. See the linked issue.
I thought you were going to say that. :) i was not aware of that. Sorry, was on my phone.
Spec would need to be updated, but sounds reasonable.
On Feb 5, 2017 2:26 PM, "Alex Beregszaszi" notifications@github.com wrote:
@tcoulter https://github.com/tcoulter there is no preprocessing needed, it is a compiler feature, it is only about passing these variables in a given format to the compiler. See the linked issue.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277555107, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFp1WhyqXw3vmJJ_54Wu_gW6XDK3owLks5rZkywgaJpZM4L3pn9 .
Axic, can you link me to anywhere that I can read more about this? Not a computer feature I'm currently aware of.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017, 3:28 PM Tim Coulter notifications@github.com wrote:
I thought you were going to say that. :) i was not aware of that. Sorry, was on my phone.
Spec would need to be updated, but sounds reasonable.
On Feb 5, 2017 2:26 PM, "Alex Beregszaszi" notifications@github.com wrote:
@tcoulter https://github.com/tcoulter there is no preprocessing needed, it is a compiler feature, it is only about passing these variables in a given format to the compiler. See the linked issue.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277555107, or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFp1WhyqXw3vmJJ_54Wu_gW6XDK3owLks5rZkywgaJpZM4L3pn9
.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277555195, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAyTgtXMQXrepWWgLMUgO3mxzrbJgPDYks5rZk0HgaJpZM4L3pn9 .
For more details see: ethereum/solidity#1650
The link on the top ^^ 😉
My apologies. Also on mobile.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017, 3:32 PM Alex Beregszaszi notifications@github.com wrote:
For more details see: ethereum/solidity#1650 https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/issues/1650
The link on the top ^^ 😉
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277555496, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAyTgr_ywYHHgclkvo-Nj0lDYB4hqjCQks5rZk3tgaJpZM4L3pn9 .
All of you sitting at the Superbowl and texting? :)
Building Lego cities with my 3 year old.
Yes this totally fits in the spec. Probably in an update to the compiler setting section.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017, 3:34 PM Alex Beregszaszi notifications@github.com wrote:
All of you sitting at the Superbowl and texting? :)
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277555613, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAyTgu0qv0NOc-kiVPjDETf1ExL5hrWjks5rZk5agaJpZM4L3pn9 .
Hmmm...when i am less inebriated i will have to reread this. Because currently its not making full sense to me.
Copied the sample configuration from Solidity to this issue. Probably clearer this way.
between this and erc190 I don't feel insane anymore! yay!
I <3 ethpm so much
:P So I'm thinking that this is getting a general 👍 and makes sense as the first element for what we can call either the v1.1
version of the spec or v2
depending on what versioning scheme we'd like to use. I think I'm preferential to v2
I'm also preferential to whole number version increments.
Also :+1: for this feature.
On Feb 5, 2017 3:51 PM, "Piper Merriam" notifications@github.com wrote:
:P So I'm thinking that this is getting a general 👍 and makes sense as the first element for what we can call either the v1.1 version of the spec or v2 depending on what versioning scheme we'd like to use. I think I'm preferential to v2
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethpm/ethpm-spec/issues/55#issuecomment-277560568, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFp1b476xemvbxcJN-epZO1jxL6Z4Tnks5rZmBzgaJpZM4L3pn9 .
(closing, won't fix)
Contract source is already used as an opaque blob of text, and there exists a property for compiler settings. Instead, compiler settings should be expanded to be more lenient (see #81); this would enable this use case.
For example the following contract uses an external variable:
That variable could be defined in the package configuration in a form similar to this:
Would that make any sense for ethpm?
For more details see: https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/issues/1650