Open maharshi365 opened 3 months ago
Technically it's pretty easy to implement (see this part) but two things that immediately come to mind
foo(address a)
, foo(address b)
, foo(address c)
and so on. Do you just return all possible parameter names (a, b, c,...)?Anyhow, I won't work on this mainly because of lack of time and motivation (as can be seen by the amount of open issues). However, I'd be happy to merge any PR if you feel motivated enough.
Hi,
Would it be possible to add the param information as well as the indexed information to the signatures that are being stored. For example if we look up a generic ERC20 Transfer on etherface we see the following:
Search: 0xddf252ad1be2c89b69c2b068fc378daa952ba7f163c4a11628f55a4df523b3ef Result: Transfer(address,address,uint256)
I think it would be better to store the additional information to help make decoding uses cases easier. Below is what I suggest.
Search: 0xddf252ad1be2c89b69c2b068fc378daa952ba7f163c4a11628f55a4df523b3ef Result: Transfer(address indexed from, address indexed to, uint256 value)