Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update proxy names #2323

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 4, 2024
Merged

Update proxy names #2323

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f0120ae
Update proxy names
k1rill-fedoseev Oct 25, 2024
8eaf5ee
Update playwright screenshots
k1rill-fedoseev Oct 28, 2024
4c44dce
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:blockscout/frontend into kf/chore/p…
tom2drum Nov 4, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions ui/address/contract/ContractCodeProxyPattern.tsx
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -44,18 +44,18 @@ const PROXY_TYPES: Record<NonNullable<SmartContractProxyType>, {
link: 'https://github.com/wighawag/clones-with-immutable-args',
},
master_copy: {
name: 'GnosisSafe',
name: 'Safe proxy',
Copy link
Member

@rimrakhimov rimrakhimov Oct 28, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm voting for the second variant with "standard" or "pattern" word at the end (e.g., 'Safe proxy standard' or 'Safe proxy pattern'). Imho, "This proxy contract is detected via Safe proxy pattern" would be more descriptive. And the same goes with Compound protocol, imo

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do you think about EIP-based proxies? I've decided to keep "Safe proxy" for consistency, because we don't write "EIP-1167 pattern". I think if we decide to use word "pattern", then it should be added for all variants.

Copy link
Member

@rimrakhimov rimrakhimov Oct 28, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"EIP-1167 pattern" looks fine for me

Copy link
Member

@rimrakhimov rimrakhimov Oct 28, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general, though, I'm not sure, that the word "pattern" is necessary in case of EIPs, even if we decide to use it for non-EIP patterns. In my understanding, the word "EIP" implies that it is a standard by itself, while "Safe proxy" does not

link: 'https://github.com/safe-global/safe-smart-account',
},
comptroller: {
name: 'Compound protocol',
name: 'Compound protocol proxy',
link: 'https://github.com/compound-finance/compound-protocol',
},
basic_implementation: {
name: 'public implementation getter in proxy smart-contract',
name: 'public implementation() getter',
},
basic_get_implementation: {
name: 'public getImplementation getter in proxy smart-contract',
name: 'public getImplementation() getter',
},
unknown: {
name: 'Unknown proxy pattern',
Expand Down
Binary file modified ...eProxyPattern.pw.tsx_default_proxy-type-with-link-but-without-description-1.png
View file
Open in desktop
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.
Binary file modified ...enshots__/ContractCodeProxyPattern.pw.tsx_default_proxy-type-without-link-1.png
View file
Open in desktop
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.