// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-3.0
pragma solidity ^0.8.12;
struct account{
string _name;
uint _acc_id;
uint balance;
}
contract My_acc{
account public person;
constructor(string memory name, uint acc_id, uint _balance){
person._name = name;
person._acc_id = acc_id;
person.balance = _balance;
}
}
I am trying to pass values to struct variable through constructor But I am getting this following error.
creation of My_acc errored: Error encoding arguments: Error: invalid BigNumber string (argument="value", value="", code=INVALID_ARGUMENT, version=bignumber/5.5.0)
I tried running the same code and it worked just fine.
Constructor runs only once and that is at the time of deployment. Since you are passing the values to constructor, you should pass the values at the time of deployment.
My reputation does not seem to allow me to upload the image. Please go through the link below.
https://i.stack.imgur.com/AFBWd.png
So guys, I resolved the error. It wasn't actually an error. It was just a silly mistake that I made as a beginner.
SOLUTION: -
I wasn't actually passing values to constructor initially. Actually when we add constructor in our contract we basically get a input section with our deploy button automatically (even before actually deploying). which have to be used to pass values before deploying our contract.
Related
-----START EDIT-----
I don't know what I was doing wrong before, but the code below was somehow not working for me, and now is working, and it's exactly the same. I don't know how or what I was missing before, but both this minimal example and the real project I am working on is working now. Obviously I changed something, but I can't figure out what. I just know it's working now. Sorry for the confusion and thanks to everyone for helping.
-----END EDIT-----
I am new to Solidity and am using the Factory pattern for deploying a contract from another contract. I am trying to get the contract address of the deployed contract, but I am running into errors.
I already tried the solution in this question, but I'm getting the following error: Return argument type struct StorageFactory.ContractData storage ref is not implicitly convertible to expected type (type of first return variable) address.
Here is my code:
// START EDIT (adding version)
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
// END EDIT
contract StorageFactory {
struct ContractData {
address contractAddress; // I want to save the deployed contract address in a mapping that includes this struct
bool exists;
}
// mapping from address of user who deployed new Storage contract => ContractData struct (which includes the contract address)
mapping(address => ContractData) public userAddressToStruct;
function createStorageContract(address _userAddress) public {
// require that the user has not previously deployed a storage contract
require(!userAddressToStruct[_userAddress].exists, "Account already exists");
// TRYING TO GET THE ADDRESS OF THE NEWLY CREATED CONTRACT HERE, BUT GETTING AN ERROR
address contractAddress = address(new StorageContract(_userAddress));
// trying to save the contractAddress here but unable to isolate the contract address
userAddressToStruct[_userAddress].contractAddress = contractAddress;
userAddressToStruct[_userAddress].exists = true;
}
}
// arbitrary StorageContract being deployed
contract StorageContract {
address immutable deployedBy;
constructor(address _deployedBy) {
deployedBy = _deployedBy;
}
}
How can I get this contract address, so I can store it in the ContractData struct? Thanks.
I compiled your contract, deployed it on Remix, and interacted without issue with this setting
pragma solidity >=0.7.0 <0.9.0;
I think you had this in your contract before
userAddressToStruct[_userAddress] = contractAddress;
instead of this
userAddressToStruct[_userAddress].contractAddress = contractAddress;
You can use the following code to get the address of the deployed contract:
address contractAddress;
(contractAddress,) = new StorageContract(_userAddress);
userAddressToStruct[_userAddress].contractAddress = contractAddress;
I'm trying to retrieve the total supply of an ERC1155 SmartContract. This code was made by my friend and has been deployed. He took the code from OpenZeppelin with Burnable and Pausable presets.
The function totalSupply that I am trying to retrieve exists in the code. But, when I see the ABI, the totalSupply does not included.
(Sorry for small screenshot. Please see this screenshot in the new tab)
MyErc1155Contract compiled
This is where to get the ABI
Full code is here: click_this_to_go_to_pastebin
Then I am trying to write smartcontract to retrieve the totalSupply;
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
contract TotSup {
uint256 public hasilBal;
uint256 public hasil;
function balanceOf(address erc1155_address,
address user_address,
uint256 nft_id) public {
(bool successA, bytes memory resultA) =
erc1155_address.call(abi.encodeWithSignature(
"balanceOf(address,uint256)",
user_address,
nft_id
));
hasil = abi.decode(resultA, (uint256));
}
function bal(address erc1155_address, uint256 nft_id) public {
(bool successA, bytes memory resultA) =
erc1155_address.call(
abi.encodeWithSignature("totalSupply(uint256)", nft_id
));
hasilBal = abi.decode(resultA, (uint256));
}
}
I test my idea with writing another function balanceOf and it works perfectly.
And for the totalSupply in function bal is fail.
Is it possible to retrieve or calling function which is not included in the ABI? If yes, how to achieve that? And last, why call balanceOf still need for paying gas for just retrieving the data?
When a function exists in the code when you compile the code it reflects in the ABI, Without the function signature, you can't call the function.
As for your second answer, balanceOf in TotSup will cost you gas as it is not a view function.
I am trying to deploy a contract from another contract following the example from here
At some point the example states:
Instanciating a new Counter for someone will look like this:
function createCounter() public {
require (_counters[msg.sender] == Counter(0));
_counters[msg.sender] = new Counter(msg.sender);
}
We first check if the person already owns a counter. If he does not own a counter we instantiate a new counter by passing his address to the Counter constructor and assign the newly created instance to the mapping.
However, when I try that in my factory contract:
pragma solidity >=0.7.0 <0.9.0;
contract Factory {
mapping(address => Campaign) _campaigns;
function createCampaign(uint minContrib) public {
require(_campaigns[msg.sender] == Campaign(0));
_campaigns[msg.sender] = new Campaign(minContrib, msg.sender);
}
}
...
contract Campaign {
/* Irrelevant code skipped ... */
constructor (uint minContrib, address creator) {
manager = creator;
minContribution = minContrib;
}
compilation error pops:
from solidity:
TypeError: Explicit type conversion not allowed from "int_const 0" to "contract Campaign".
--> contracts/3_Ballot.sol:10:43:
|
10 | require(_campaigns[msg.sender] == Campaign(0));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^
What comparison is being made here exactly?
require (_counters[msg.sender] == Counter(0));
What is Counter(0)? An instance of contract (like new Counter(0)) or a type conversion of parameter 'int_const' to 'contract'?
Found this this answer which made things a bit clearer.
Apparently this is trying to compare the Contract deployed at address 0 with thatever is stored at _counters[msg.sender] (which I believe should be the address of a deployed contract).
require (_counters[msg.sender] == Counter(0));
With that in mind, I get the error is saying "we're expecting a Counter or address of contract and you give us an int".
I fixed it with Counter(address(0)).
Following smart contract works fine in Remix and Ganache. However doesn't work on private ethereum blockchains like Kaleido or Azure. What am I missing. When I call setA it consumes all gas and then fails.
pragma solidity ^0.4.24;
contract TestA {
uint public someValue;
function setValue(uint a) public returns (bool){
someValue = a;
return true;
}
}
contract TestB {
address public recentA;
function createA() public returns (address) {
recentA = new TestA();
return recentA;
}
function setA() public returns (bool) {
TestA(recentA).setValue(6);
return true;
}
}
I tried your contract in Kaleido, and found even calling eth_estimateGas with very large numbers was resulting in "out of gas".
I changed the setValue cross-contract call to set a gas value, and I was then able to call setA, and estimating the gas for setA showed just 31663.
recentA.setValue.gas(10000)(6);
I suspect this EVM behavior is related to permissioned chains with a gasprice of zero. However, that is speculation as I haven't investigated the internals.
I've also added eth_estimateGas, and support for multiple contracts in a Solidity file, to kaleido-go here in case it's helpful:
https://github.com/kaleido-io/kaleido-go
Another possibility for others encountering "out of gas" calling across contracts - In Geth if a require call fails in a called contract, the error is reported as "out of gas" (rather than "execution reverted", or a detailed reason for the require failing).
You are hitting the limit of gas allowed to be spent per block. Information about gas limit is included into every block, so you can check what's this value is right now in your blockchain. Currently on Ethereum MainNet, GasLimit (per block) is about 8 millions (see here https://etherscan.io/blocks)
To fix this, you can start your blockchain with modified genesis file. Try to increase value of gasLimit parameter in your genesis file, which specifies the maximum amount of gas processed per block. Try "gasLimit": "8000000".
Try to discard the return statement of setValue method in contract TestA.
pragma solidity ^0.4.24;
contract TestA {
uint public someValue;
function setValue(uint a) public {
someValue = a;
}
}
I have 2 basic contracts: one is for token and the second is for sale.
Token сontract:
contract MyToken is StandardToken, Ownable {
string public constant name = "My Sample Token";
string public constant symbol = "MST";
uint32 public constant decimals = 18;
function MyToken(uint _totalSupply) {
require (_totalSupply > 0);
totalSupply = _totalSupply;
balances[msg.sender] = totalSupply;
}
}
Sale Contract
contract Sale {
address owner;
address public founderAddress;
uint256 public constant foundersAmount = 50;
MyToken public token = new MyToken(1000);
uint256 public issuedTokensAmount = 0;
function Sale() {
owner = msg.sender;
founderAddress = 0x14723a09acff6d2a60dcdf7aa4aff308fddc160c;
token.transfer(founderAddress, foundersAmount);
}
function() external payable {
token.transfer(msg.sender, 1);
owner.transfer(msg.value);
}
}
StandardToken and Ownable are all standard implementations from OpenZeppelin repository. Full contract source is available here.
So basically in my Sale Contract I create an instance of my token contract with fixed supply and assign all of the tokens to the caller. Then I transfer some amount of tokens to founder address. When I try to send some ethereum to Sale contract I'm attempting to transfer some of my tokens to the sender (Running all code in Remix browser, I create an instance of Sale contract and call "fallback" method specifying some ether amount). However, this fails with "Exception during execution. (invalid opcode). Please debug the transaction for more information." message. All that I can see when debugging is that code fails in payable method at line:
token.transfer(msg.sender, 1);
I can't see the exact reason for this as I'm not able to step into this method and see whats going on inside.
Interesting thing is that when I remove a call to transfer method on token instance in Sale Contract constructor - code seems to run fine without any exceptions.
What am I missing?
I debugged into the the contract using remix, and the invalid opcode is thrown by:
290 DUP8
291 DUP1
292 EXTCODESIZE
293 ISZERO
294 ISZERO
295 PUSH2 012f
298 JUMPI
299 PUSH1 00
301 DUP1
302 INVALID
I left out the rest, but essentially it loads the address of the token contract and calls EXTCODESIZE which retrieves the contracts code size, and checks that it's not equal to 0 (the token contract exists), unfortunately, it did equate to 0. At this point, I'm unsure whether this is a limitation in remix or I've misunderstood the setup.
I tried the identical contract setup on truffle + testrpc and it deployed, accepted the currency successfully. Do note however that testrpc indicated:
Gas usage: 59137
Meaning that this is above the default sendTransaction w/ no data default (21,000 gas). This means that in a live environment, ensure that you inform users to include extra gas, otherwise the fallback function would probably fail due to OOG errors.
The reason behind this is that you're using a fallback function. Try using a normal function and it should happen.