-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Review eth contract #114
Review eth contract #114
Conversation
@@ -100,6 +100,12 @@ contract Most is | |||
// | |||
// Tx emits a CrosschainTransferRequest event that the relayers listen to | |||
// & forward to the destination chain. | |||
|
|||
// let's use modern standards. |
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.
can you clarify this comment a bit, I'm not sure I follow.
Regardless of whether the allowance is increased via approve
or permit
the end result is the same - Most can spend up to a value
on behalf of the sender, so it's more of a concern for the fronted to distinguish if token implement the ERC and whether to ask the user to sign a permit
or just a plain approval
tx ?
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.
permit
allows someone to execute approve
on behalf of someone else. For the bridge frontend client, it might not be that useful. But for some users of bridge, who want to cross-contract call the bridge it might be very useful.
No description provided.