exp. with Foundry recently, and it's cool, but I'm a bit confused as to why testing in Solidity is preferred when it's highly likely interactions w/ your contract will need to use JS/TS anyway.

3P apps call your contract directly via frontend or they have a contract that calls your contract that itself uses a frontend

/bettik founder /outercorps stalwart | ex-binance, ex-celsiusX

There are many tools that will generate typescript bindings for a contract based on its ABI.

The graph outputs a interface you can apply to a ethers Contract. I always add a command in package.json to build the contract typings.

Working on building zkTLS infra/products. A ruthless empiricist and meme connoisseur.

/opacity
/eulerlagrange

The typings support geth.

So if your contract function needs a int256, if you provide:

1. “0x111…”
2. “1111…”
3. new BigNumber(“1111”)

They’ll all work.

If you replace the ABI json in this repo you can try it yourself:

The typings support geth.

So if your contract function needs a int256, if you provide:

1. “0x111…”
2. “1111…”
3. new BigNumber(“1111”)

They’ll all work.

If you replace the ABI json in this repo you can try it yourself: https://github.com/Hmac512/elffjs-nft-graph/tree/master

Right, but to be clear on what you're implying - you're saying that if typechain typings are able to be created, data translation is assumed to be accurate?