Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
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
Destroy standard #182
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Destroy standard #182
Changes from 18 commits
1fc1056
7dc58fb
235a25b
9e57653
24682e3
7ea7e1a
6d34895
56cbc27
886fcfd
a0a3889
2bf4906
79c1d7d
6b86a9a
671e77b
65aee23
e063ea8
580ba78
196cd7b
a9e434b
a2f728e
6219503
e932658
4dc0ba3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can avoid this and have a specific (parameterless) interface just like for
update
. Suppose I want to create a NEP-DESTROY-compatible CLI command, it'd be harder to do this if one contract has parameters and the other does not.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we strictly require zero parameters in the standard, or it is just a "SHOULD" requirement?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the practical value of parameters here? I can only imagine moving tokens from contract address before deletion (which might require some address), but likely they'll be sent to owner or this can be handled in a different manner by contract. Conditional (based on parameters) destroy? Not likely to be useful, owner can do anything already, so if he decides to destroy he will do this. So I'd go with MUST here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Still relevant, this NEP doesn't make much sense if parameters are not fixed.