phil pfp
phil
@phil
@cameron I’m not familiar with the contributeETH method used in the recent Purple proposal. What does it do, and how do it differ from a simple transfer function?
3 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
It’s a specific method that @fabric built into their contract that makes their product work. If we didn’t use that, we unfortunately wouldn’t be able to have @purple contribute directly to the crowdfund. @nonlinear.eth anything that I missed?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
scottrepreneur pfp
scottrepreneur
@scottrepreneur.eth
Is there a fallback function on these contracts @nonlinear.eth? Would be helpful I assume
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jonny Mack pfp
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
fallback?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/learn-ethereum/9781789954111/0bc452a8-d2b7-477a-b64c-bf497af4b5b1.xhtml#:~:text=A%20fallback%20function%20is%20an,match%20the%20intended%20function%20calls.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Jonny Mack pfp
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
ah. no, no fallback. will consider for future versions. cc/ @ds
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Danny pfp
Danny
@ds
Because tokens can be contributed, and returned to contributors, we used explicit calls for them as to disambiguate a defined receive function.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Danny pfp
Danny
@ds
For example, imagine receive was implemented and sending eth to the contract would contribute eth if the fund was open, or allocate yield if the fund was successful. Now imagine a proposal passing after it hit max goal, and the transaction occurs. The funds would be allocated to the contributes pro-rata.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
scottrepreneur pfp
scottrepreneur
@scottrepreneur.eth
Probably should explicitly reject, ideally. So funds aren't trapped
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Danny pfp
Danny
@ds
It will reject on receive. An explicit and meaningful message makes sense though.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction