Which version of solidity is most stable to use? - ethereum

Suppose I am making an NFT Marketplace project, which version of node and solidity should I use so they don't conflict with between packages?

This depends on which packages you are going to use.
Because you did not the list of the packages in the question, then it is not possible to give a better answer.
I also suggest to read xyproblem for asking more precise question.

Related

Secp256k1 solidity contract assembly errors: SyntaxError: loop flag outdated. Please consider using "switch", "if" or "for" statements instead

I'm working on updating some smart contracts to deploy on the Ethereum blockchain, however the cryptographic primitive for this project are really outdated and I don't know enough about cryptography to update them. Can anyone help me to rewrite the code? The repo is here -> [https://github.com/kCox96/smart-contracts/blob/master/contracts/Secp256k1_noconflict.sol]
Please don't write your own crypto!
If you just want to verify ecdsa-signatures you can use ecrecover() a builtin function to verify signatures, or this library https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/master/contracts/cryptography/ECDSA.sol
If you really need these curve functions there are some libraries out there (e.g. https://github.com/tdrerup/elliptic-curve-solidity) but they also seem to be not well maintained

jodd build simple auth issues

I was trying to build a simple auth mechanism using madvoc and interceptors but it seems that the tutorial at
http://jodd.org/doc/example/auth-with-interceptors.html
is a little bit outdated.
I think that the tag was removed and I was not able to find the substituent.
How should we use the form in general and what is the recommended auth mechanism?
P.S. - I`m using latest jodd version.
The shortest answer is to check module jodd-joy. Look at the package jodd.joy.auth. It contains latest AuthTag, AuthAction that may be used, etc. This module contains some helpers for build an web-app even faster.
I will update this answer later, with more info - actually, I will try to update the website, too. But in general, the idea behind the auth is not much changed;)

Does SAP ABAP offer a way to sign assemblies?

I'm trying to find out whether it is possible to sign binaries written for SAP systems in ABAP. Contextually does it make sense? I've only found some reference to an add-on assembly kit which seems to be some sort of packaging standard. Can this be used to authenticate the source and integrity of ABAP modules?
Greatly appreciate your feedback~!
I seem to have found an answer to my question somewhat...one forum discussion states that ABAP is only interpreted and that there are no binaries to sign in the first place. I'm a bit confused though as to what the Add-on Assembly Kit is. I suppose it's a way of packaging the ABAP code into a certifiable package, which I suppose is the closest we'll get to what I'm looking for-although I'm not sure how this works if you're not interested in sharing the package with SAP for certification...If you have any insights please enlighten me.
Thanks!
not positive of your end requirement but I'll answer the best I can. ABAP is interpreted so there really is no need to sign a binary as there is none to sign. Because third party's needed ways to deliver solutions or code to their customers in a packaged manner SAP developed the add-on assembly toolkit, (emphasis on assembly) this allows the third party a tool to package all the solution pieces,( classes, tables, includes, screens etc.) into an add-on that can be installed, versioned etc. in your customers SAP system. So it's main purpose is to allow you to assemble the myriad pieces that make up your solution.
Of course if your talking about a single app, report etc. this obviously would be overkill.
If what you are seeking is a way to know that an app comes from your specific company, then you can request a custom namespace, when you get one assigned they issue you a key which only your company uses to install the namespace and that sort of works like signing, your programs will all exist in your namespace and be identified as such.
I'm sure there are more details others can provide but that should get you started.
Later.....

Where is Castle Windsor FromAssembly class located?

As you can see in Windsor wiki
There is a class named FromAssembly to help me with installers. But i'm unable to find it anywhere in Castle.*
I'm using .NET 4
It's an old question, but I just ran into the same problem. Took a little while to find FromAssembly (I should get ReSharper). Finally found it!
using Castle.Windsor.Installer;
You can download the source code and do a crtrl-f on the solution:
http://github.com/castleproject/Castle.InversionOfControl
You will need a git client tool, Follow the instructions on the TortoiseGIT site to get one up and running if you dont have one already.

Mercurial: How to manage common/shared code

I'm using Mercurial for personal use and am conteplating it for some distributed projects as an alternative to SVN for various reasons.
I'm getting comfortable with using it for self contained projects and can see various options for sharing however I haven't yet found any guidance on managing common libraries to be included in multiple projects in a similar manner to that provided by externals in subversion.
The most obvious shared lump of code is error handling and reporting - we want this to be pretty much the same in all projects (its fairly well evolved). There is also utility code, control libraries and similar that we find better to have as projects built with each solution than to pull in as compiled classes (not least because it ensures they are kept up to date, continuous integration helps us address breaking changes).
Thoughts (I hate open ended questions, but I want to know what, if anything, others are doing).
Mercurial 1.3 now includes nested repository support, which can be used to express dependencies. The other option is to let your build system handle the download and tracking of dependencies using something like ivy or maven though those are more focused on pulling down compiled code.
The world has changed since I asked that question and the solution I now use is different.
The simple answer is now to use packages (specifically NuGet as I do .NET) to deliver the common code instead of nesting repos and including the projects in a solution.
So I have common code built into NuGet packages by and hosted using TeamCity and where previously I would have an external and include the project/source I would now just reference the package.
Use the Forest Extension it emulates svn externals for HG, to some extent that is.
Subrepository (with good guide) or Guestrepo "to overcome ... limitations" (of subrepos) is today's language-agnostic answer