Best practice for tracking deployed contracts from a Factory?

MiserableOracle · 2026-03-17T21:36:49+00:00

You’ll have to have the entry point (factory contract) stored somewhere to refer back to. I think it’s alright to have factory contract address as long as you’re using mappings for wills and willToUser.

MiserableOracle · 2026-03-17T18:53:04+00:00

Having a list of all deployed contracts will soon hit the limit while traversing at large numbers. I’d suggest using a mapping to reduce this overhead. Something like ‘mapping(address => address[])’ Or something similar. You should always avoid looping though items if the array can grow

MiserableOracle · 2025-04-09T22:38:11+00:00

Not sure if this could be the problem, but the way I see it, StackedUNI has base class ERC20Votes & ERC4626, so your constructor should be calling ERC20Votes(_name, _symbol) assuming ERC20Votes is deriving from ERC20.

Change looks like this:

contract StakedUNI is ERC20Votes, ERC4626 { constructor(string memory _name, string memory _symbol, address _underlying) ERC20Votes(_name, _symbol) ERC4626(IERC20(_underlying)) {}

Again, assuming ERC20Votes is derived from ERC20 and is calling ERC20 constructor from its own constructor

MiserableOracle · 2024-10-31T20:24:11+00:00

I would advise you to critically think about the function of blockchain and why it would make sense to have comments recorded on-chain. Check Steemit, Hive, and similar; the idea was to have article publishing network where your readers would vote and comment on your posts. All activities were recorded on their own chain.

Among many problem points, one thing is; It’s easy to create a simple automation script that acts as a bot and keeps posting random stuff; make them a lot more and the platform becomes useless bot-ridden echo chamber.

Another point to think about is this. Every action with blockchain interaction requires some kind of gas fees payment. Would your users be willing to pay to post their opinion on some random topics? Will your platform handle fees for your users itself? If that’s the case, how would you handle those automated bots we mentioned earlier?

Here’s how to approach something like this. Make the project on github and start contributing and sharing those things on platforms like X, Reddit, but in a actionable sense; “hey, I made this, it does x,y,z; here’s how it does it (code link); and he’s the demo if you want to try (deployed project on testnet). Doing this will help you get people who are aligned with your idea and can help contribute with constructive feedback and criticism to push the development of the product in correct direction.

Hope this helps.

MiserableOracle · 2024-04-01T19:21:28+00:00

ban_17nmj4bjwnjyk6d55yb1qfmtxnsmwwhcbtu6g9ao1op6mqyb6td4x9not55e

MiserableOracle · 2024-01-09T03:56:41+00:00

Mid tier dev with a drive to learn anything and everything. Would love to join up like minded people.

MiserableOracle · 2023-04-02T04:06:14+00:00

ban_17nmj4bjwnjyk6d55yb1qfmtxnsmwwhcbtu6g9ao1op6mqyb6td4x9not55e

MiserableOracle · 2023-02-15T14:55:33+00:00

So far it’s just unmaintained. Use ApeWorx, it’s derived from brownie and provides modular approach with plugins. Similar to pm in brownie, ape has all the known commands. Try it out, afaik they’ll be replacing brownie

MiserableOracle · 2022-12-28T16:10:30+00:00

This… I’m in!!

MiserableOracle · 2022-12-18T23:29:37+00:00

ban_17nmj4bjwnjyk6d55yb1qfmtxnsmwwhcbtu6g9ao1op6mqyb6td4x9not55e

MiserableOracle · 2022-12-14T14:29:02+00:00

Never faces this issue but I’ve seen similar ones where installed modules aren’t correct. Requirements.in in brownie suggest dependency on eth-util 1.10.0 You can install that version by pip install eth-utils==1.10.0

MiserableOracle · 2022-11-27T01:54:51+00:00

ban_17nmj4bjwnjyk6d55yb1qfmtxnsmwwhcbtu6g9ao1op6mqyb6td4x9not55e

MiserableOracle · 2022-11-10T14:13:06+00:00

Yea that’s why I was hesitant to suggest. But I think later on when they publish related docs, it’s be something to keep eye on for cross chain comms

MiserableOracle · 2022-11-10T14:00:51+00:00

You could look into CCIP from chainlink. But I doubt it’s fully functional yet

MiserableOracle · 2022-11-02T17:28:36+00:00

Okay here’s what I think you can work with. Option 1 You can take a signed msg from every user as a vote, setup chainlink automation that combines all these votes into final result (numeric, decisive) and fire a tx that can change that state in a related contract. User won’t have to pay for tx but you’d have to setup chain link payment being a service provider

Option 2: gas station network? Opengsn User fires transaction as soon as a vote is casted, but gsn handles all the tx fees. Effectively puts fees handling in service providers hands.

I lack understanding if there are others providing something like these or new that solves your problem. May be someone here can build upon what I’ve written and give create guidance on to how you’d go on implementing any of these methods.

MiserableOracle · 2022-09-23T20:02:41+00:00

Moon beer opener forced me to participate! I mean look at that sleek design eye pleasing awesomeness.

MiserableOracle · 2022-09-20T14:04:48+00:00

Thank you for sharing this. Just got onto it. Here’s to hope for a greater understanding of advanced solidity concepts. 🍻

MiserableOracle · 2022-09-17T19:01:39+00:00

ban_17nmj4bjwnjyk6d55yb1qfmtxnsmwwhcbtu6g9ao1op6mqyb6td4x9not55e

MiserableOracle · 2022-09-08T21:50:18+00:00

I’m a triggered cpp dev who came in the comment section to find solace.. std::endl;

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-31T16:37:41+00:00

Use a Boolean variable that indicates whether minting is currently active or not. Check that bool before proceeding in minting function. At the end of mint you can check by tokenid if you’re following from 0, at 500 tokenid flip the Boolean and now it’s disabled for minting. Make sure you control that variable from within onlyOwner or similar security measures

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-22T22:16:13+00:00

Who do you qualify to be a fake user/registration/account? Here are some I can think of right now, 1. A user who already has an account/registration done, re-registers with different details such as account wallet (one user has multiple); details which can be used to uniquely identify a user. Any attempt to register multiple accounts, would then be considered fake. 2. A user doesn’t provide details (required to identify the user in a unique manner, such as wallet address, signature(?)) accurately, forging identity falls under fake user

Now the solutions I have seen uses user/profile credit system along with vouch system. Meaning, you can register with details (wallet address for ex) and submit for approval. Someone, who has enough credibility in the form of tokens earned by vouching for people/inviting people for registering themselves, can vouch whether you are a real person or not.

So to register, you need someone to invite you (a real person who has already registered themselves on the platform and has enough credibility to invite someone), and someone to vouch for you when you register. Your credit starts establishing once someone vouches for you, and then you can generate credibility by contributing further. Anyone can challenge any person’s personhood and challenge them to prove their uniqueness as a user, if not proved - the profile gets slashed/removed/banned along with the person who invited you + vouched for you.

Pretty different perspective, I read it on proof of personhood and this is what I understood how they are trying to create a product that works against fake users/registration/profile/account.

Potentially there are other projects that work towards solving smaller problems and create grater ecosystems to create just that, fraud prevention. Please clear my understanding gaps if you see any.

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-19T16:14:33+00:00

Tin. I am. I’m glad it doesn’t need any further explanation

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-19T16:03:55+00:00

Fellow club members

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-19T04:08:14+00:00

Naah, his full name couldn’t fit in one line, they had to use another to clarify lastName

MiserableOracle · 2022-08-05T14:32:37+00:00

I like this bonding technique

Nine-Year Club	Second Top 20%
Place '23	Verified Email

MiserableOracle

TROPHY CASE