NEP-5 event naming on Neo 3 #1646
Comments
AnnaShaleva
added a commit
to nspcc-dev/neo-go
that referenced
this issue
May 15, 2020
Native contracts deployment creates `Transfer` notifications and adds them into interop context. However, these notifications were not stored for two reasons: 1. typo in `Transfer` (so these notifications were not recognised during processing of the invocation tx in (*Blockchain).storeBlock(...) method) 2. these notifications have `from` adress setted to null, so conversion to []byte fails. Related C# issue: neo-project/neo#1646 For now, made both `transfer` and `Transfer` valid.
|
Vote: uppercase (Transfer) 👍 |
|
I vote for uppercase or case-insensitive. |
AnnaShaleva
added a commit
to nspcc-dev/neo-go
that referenced
this issue
May 15, 2020
Native contracts deployment creates `Transfer` notifications and adds them into interop context. However, these notifications were not stored for two reasons: 1. typo in `Transfer` (so these notifications were not recognised during processing of the invocation tx in (*Blockchain).storeBlock(...) method) 2. these notifications have `from` adress setted to null, so conversion to []byte fails. Same thing could happen with `to`. Related C# issue: neo-project/neo#1646 For now, made both `transfer` and `Transfer` valid.
AnnaShaleva
added a commit
to nspcc-dev/neo-go
that referenced
this issue
May 19, 2020
Native contracts deployment creates `Transfer` notifications and adds them into interop context. However, these notifications were not stored for two reasons: 1. typo in `Transfer` (so these notifications were not recognised during processing of the invocation tx in (*Blockchain).storeBlock(...) method) 2. these notifications have `from` adress setted to null, so conversion to []byte fails. Same thing could happen with `to`. Related C# issue: neo-project/neo#1646 For now, made both `transfer` and `Transfer` valid.
AnnaShaleva
added a commit
to nspcc-dev/neo-go
that referenced
this issue
May 20, 2020
Native contracts deployment creates `Transfer` notifications and adds them into interop context. However, these notifications were not stored for two reasons: 1. typo in `Transfer` (so these notifications were not recognised during processing of the invocation tx in (*Blockchain).storeBlock(...) method) 2. these notifications have `from` adress setted to null, so conversion to []byte fails. Same thing could happen with `to`. Related C# issue: neo-project/neo#1646 For now, made both `transfer` and `Transfer` valid.
|
Solved by NEP-17. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Describe the bug
Native NEO and GAS contracts are not compliant with NEP-5 specification in their event (notification) name.
Details
The NEP-5 specification describes "transfer" event that is to be generated by compliant contracts under specific circumstances. It can be seen in example contract, tutorial, another example, implementation of compliant tracker plugin and compliant node. All of these work fine in Neo 2 world.
Fast-forward to Neo 3 with #717 that added native NEO and GAS contracts claiming them as supporting NEP-5. But in fact these contracts emit a bit different event named "Transfer", so technically they're not compliant with NEP-5 specification. Moreover, neo-project/neo-modules#125 changed the old standard-compliant NEP-5 tracker plugin to something working with this new "Transfer".
Expected behavior
Following existing standards in Neo 3 or creating new ones if there is a need to change something.
(Optional) Additional context
I'd suggest changing generated event name back to lower-case "transfer", because that was the name for quite some time and there is code that's expecting exactly that. Also, people trying to follow NEP-5 standard would probably be a bit surprised to find out that the new NEP-5 tracker plugin doesn't work for their contracts.
The other option of course is rolling out new specification that can define this event in any new fashion (lower case, upper case, mixed case, case-insensitive, etc...).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: