You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The coinage restriction does not allow NFT to be burned on ETH and minted on FIL.
It is possible to make the restriction not tokenId <= _sequentialUpTo()
to tokenId > _startTokenId() && tokenId <= _sequentialUpTo()
If I burn the token, can I mint _mintSpot it with the same ID within the range?
Thx.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I have the same problem, but I see your architecture is different. To understand your approach better, are you minting all 300 NFTS among 3 blockchains on the same time? So lets say user on ETH is minting 1-100 NFT's cross-chain message is sent to BSC and FIL and there we mint 101-200 and 201-300 NFT's?
I have taken approach where I mint some NFT's for user on source chain then only on cross-chain tokens transfer i mint the same amount on destination chain (locking those tokenIds on source chain), but indeed I had to make source chain to _startTokenId return 2 then on destination chain i had to override _sequentialUpTo retrun 1... This doesnt look good i know but I can use _spotMint now for 1st NFT token created (which is tokenId = 2) otherwise if we wouldnt change startId then we couldnt transfer tokenId = 0 and we couldnt even transfer tokenId = 1 as _sequentialUpTo needs to be greater than _startTokenId. I do also think minting straight away on all chains is just unnecessarily expensive.
Hello.
I create cross-chain NFT:
ETH: 1-100 NFT IDs
BSC: 101-200 NFT IDs
FIL: 201-300 NFT IDs
https://github.com/chiru-labs/ERC721A/blob/main/contracts/ERC721A.sol#L977
The coinage restriction does not allow NFT to be burned on ETH and minted on FIL.
It is possible to make the restriction not
tokenId <= _sequentialUpTo()
to
tokenId > _startTokenId() && tokenId <= _sequentialUpTo()
If I burn the token, can I mint
_mintSpot
it with the same ID within the range?Thx.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: