A place for developers to talk about building on Farcaster.

/dev

Solidity v0.8.29 includes syntax for relocating a contract's storage variables to an arbitrary location. This is necessary to make EIP7702 secure. Put together a quick thread that makes clear why this is the case:

▫️v0.8.29 brings us syntax for relocating a contract's storage variables to an arbitrary location, one of the oldest and most discussed feature requests in our issue tracker.

[EIP-7702: Set EOA account code] in the Pectra upgrade has made this feature critical for safe… https://t.co/fBLeuRyAPI

Finally!!! I spent months toiling away in mines of solidity storage. This pattern will significantly improve security for EIP-7702

A quick thread on why this is necessary for the security of EIP-7702: https://t.co/RchelK3kZe

eric.base.eth

Solidity v0.8.29 includes syntax for relocating a contract's storage variables to an arbitrary location. This is necessary to make EIP7702 secure. Put together a quick thread that makes clear why this is the case: https://x.com/0xEricBrown/status/1900189049026998457

leading DevRel @base | former founder building onchain since '17 | sharing insights from the onchain frontier

Designing and building AI systems

https://agents.gladio.ai

I’d only recommend custom storage implementations (at the contract or variable level) when there’s a clear need due to clashing risk. 

Otherwise you’re introducing unnecessary attack surface and making code less legible

Super cool, is there any reason to not continue using hard coded storage locations ie. hashing a variable name into a pointer and using that pointer directly?