Function getBets() gives me the error: error: Failed to decode output: Error: Unsupported or invalid type: tuple. What am I missing?
pragma solidity ^0.4.11;
contract Casino {
struct Bet {
address by;
uint number;
}
address owner;
Bet[] bets;
event BetPlaced(Bet bet);
function Casino() {
owner = msg.sender;
}
function bet(uint number) {
Bet memory bet;
bet.by = msg.sender;
bet.number = number;
bets.push(bet);
BetPlaced(bet);
}
function getBets() constant returns (Bet[]) {
return bets;
}
function getCount() constant returns (uint length) {
return bets.length;
}
}
At the moment if I'm correct you can't return anything except an array of integers as there is no support for returning multi-dimensional data storages;
You can use an experimental library using:
pragma experimental ABIEncoderV2;
in the place of:
pragma solidity ^0.4.11;
This isn't available on Remix if you're using that at the moment and it's experimental so it may never be part of Solidity source: https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/issues/2948
If you did want to return an array of structs you could convert the whole array to bytes and return the bytes. This would be a bit of an extreme case and I wouldn't advise it.
If you only need to access the method internally and not externally you can pass by storage e.g.
function getBets() internal returns (Bet[] storage _r) {
_v = bets;
}
You may want to switch your struct to another contract. This way you can return an array of addresses. I have found using structs is only useful in storing and retrieving "that" data. Contracts are better to return sets of addresses. Also, I have not used the experimental encoder, so just going off of the current solidity version.
Related
I am using this version of solidity, pragma solidity >=0.4.22 <0.9.0;
Whenever I compile truffle I get this TypeError: Member "length". When I change the version to 0.4.0 the error goes away, but I can't use this version. I need to use this pragma solidity >=0.4.22 <0.9.0;
Here is the error:
TypeError: Member "length" is read-only and cannot be used to resize arrays.
--> project:/contracts/Ballot1.sol:23:9:
|
23 | proposals.length = _numProposal;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Compilation failed. See above.
From Solidity v0.6.0 and onwards, you can use an array slice such as proposals[start:end] (note: it only supports calldata array).
Otherwise, I think you might need to build a copy of the array like so:
function slice(
uint256 start,
uint256 end,
uint256[] memory proposals
) public pure returns (uint256[] memory) {
uint256[] memory result;
uint256 idx = 0;
for (uint256 i = start; i < end; i++) {
result[idx] = proposals[i];
idx++;
}
return result;
}
Note this operation can be quite costly if you have a large array.
As it is now, anyone can call the setMyString function in the FirstContract. I'm trying to restrict access to that function to an instance of SecondContract. But not one specific instance, any contract of type SecondContract should be able to call setMyString.
contract FirstContract{
String public myString;
function setMyString(String memory what) public {
myString=what;
}
}
contract SecondContract{
address owner;
address firstAddress;
FirstContract firstContract;
constructor(address _1st){
owner=msg.sender;
firstAddress=_1st;
firstContract=FirstContract(firstAddress);
}
function callFirst(String memory what){
require(msg.sender==owner);
firstContract.setMyString("hello");
}
}
Solidity currently doesn't have an easy way to validate an address against an interface.
You can check the bytecode, whether it contains the specified signatures (of the public properties and methods). This requires a bit larger scope than a usual StackOverflow answer, so I'm just going to describe the steps instead of writing the code.
First, define the desired list of signatures (1st 4 bytes of keccak256 hash of the name and arguments datatypes) that you're going to be looking for. You can find more info about signatures in my other answers here and here.
An example in the documentation shows how to get any address's (in your case msg.sender) bytecode as bytes (dynamic-length array).
You'll then need to loop through the returned bytes array and search for the 4-byte signatures.
If you find them all, it means that msg.sender "implements the interface". If any of the signatures is missing in the external contract, it means it doesn't implement the interface.
But... I'd really recommend you to rethink your approach to whitelisting. Yes, you'll need to maintain the list and call setIsSecondContract() when a new SecondContract wants to call the setMyString() function for the first time. But it's more gas efficient for all callers of the FirstContract's setMyString() function, as well as easier to write and test the functionality in the first place.
contract FirstContract{
String public myString;
address owner;
mapping (address => bool) isSecondContract;
modifier onlySecondContract {
require(isSecondContract[msg.sender]);
_;
}
modifier onlyOwner {
require(msg.sender == owner);
_;
}
function setIsSecondContract(address _address, bool _value) public onlyOwner {
isSecondContract[_address] = _value;
}
function setMyString(String memory what) public onlySecondContract {
myString=what;
}
}
In order to change the state of the smart contract from front end inputs, wanted to submit string array to a smart contract , key value pair or objects.
Is it possible to use string array as parameter?
No solidity doesn't support arrays of strings as parameter. You would have to serialize and deserialize it in a string yourself to have the desired result but that would be expensive to do in solidity. You can test that on remix if you want. However, on remix the error message says that this function is supported in the experimental ABI encoder but I have never tested that, or how well it works with other libraries, and it is experimental after all.
As seen in below example from solidity document we can send bytes array to constructor
constructor(bytes32[] memory proposalNames) public {
chairperson = msg.sender;
voters[chairperson].weight = 1;
// For each of the provided proposal names,
// create a new proposal object and add it
// to the end of the array.
for (uint i = 0; i < proposalNames.length; i++) {
// `Proposal({...})` creates a temporary
// Proposal object and `proposals.push(...)`
// appends it to the end of `proposals`.
proposals.push(Proposal({
name: proposalNames[i],
voteCount: 0
}));
}
}
If you are trying to send string/Objects data specifically then it's better to separate out the methods and call each methods separately or within each other as currently solidity does not support that (using ABIencodere v2 is exceptional as it is only recommended for development purpose- as per on the date of this answer written)
struct A{
uint date,
B[] b
}
You can separate this out to
struct A{
uint date
}
struct B{
string goods,
uint quantity
}
so now for 1 A you can call N B from your service. Use mapping for binding both(if dependent).
In current situation it's better to design a contract which does not take bulk inputs or give out bulk outputs. However contracts are not for storage of huge data it's for storage of related data which fulfills agreement between parties
I'm building a game on ethereum as my first project and I'm facing with the storage and gas limits. I would like to store a storage smart contract on the blockchain to be queried after the deployment. I really need to initialize a fixed length array with constant values I insert manually. My situation is the following:
contract A {
...some states variables/modifiers and events......
uint[] public vector = new uint[](162);
vector = [.......1, 2, 3,......];
function A () {
....some code....
ContractB contract = new ContractB(vector);
}
....functions....
}
This code doesn't deploy. Apparently I exceed gas limits on remix. I tried the following:
I split the vector in 10 different vectors and then pass just one of them to the constructor. With this the deploy works.
I really need to have just one single vector because it represents the edges set of a graph where ContractB is the data structure to build a graph. Vectors elements are ordered like this:
vector = [edge1From, edge1To, edge2From, edge2To,.......]
and I got 81 edges (162 entries in the vector).
I tought I can create a setData function that push the values in the vector one by one calling this function after the deployment but this is not my case because I need to have the vector filled before the call
ContractB contract = new ContractB(vector);
Now I can see I have two doubts:
1) Am I wrong trying to pass a vector as parameter in a function call inside the A constructor ?
2) I can see that I can create a double mapping for the edges. Something like
mapping (bool => mapping(uint => uint))
but then I will need multi-key valued mappings (more edges starting from the same point) and I will have the problem to initialize all the mappings at once like I do with the vector?
Why does the contract need to be initialized at construction time?
This should work
pragma solidity ^0.4.2;
contract Graph {
address owner;
struct GraphEdge {
uint128 from;
uint128 to;
}
GraphEdge[] public graph;
bool public initialized = false;
constructor() public {
owner = msg.sender;
}
function addEdge(uint128 edgeFrom, uint128 edgeTo) public {
require(!initialized);
graph.push(GraphEdge({
from: edgeFrom,
to: edgeTo
}));
}
function finalize() public {
require(msg.sender == owner);
initialized = true;
}
}
contract ContractB {
Graph graph;
constructor(address graphAddress) public {
Graph _graph = Graph(graphAddress);
require(_graph.initialized());
graph = _graph;
}
}
If the range of values for you array are small enough, you can save on gas consumption by using a more appropriate size for your uints. Ethereum stores values into 32-bytes slots and you pay 20,000 gas for every slot used. If you are able to use a smaller sized uint (remember, uint is the same as uint256), you'll be able to save on gas usage.
For example, consider the following contract:
pragma solidity ^0.4.19;
contract Test {
uint256[100] big;
uint128[100] small;
function addBig(uint8 index, uint256 num) public {
big[index] = num;
}
function addSmall(uint8 index, uint128 num1, uint128 num2) public {
small[index] = num1;
small[index + 1] = num2;
}
}
Calling addBig() each time with a previously unused index will have an execution cost of a little over 20,000 gas and results in one value being added to an array. Calling addSmall() each time will cost about 26,000, but you're adding 2 elements to the array. Both only use 1 slot of storage. You can get even better results if you can go smaller than uint128.
Another option (depending on if you need to manipulate the array data) is to store your vector off chain. You can use an oracle to retrieve data or store your data in IPFS.
If neither of those options work for your use case, then you'll have to change your data structure and/or use multiple transactions to initialize your array.
I'm new to solidity and I'm just experiencing with some simple code.
Basically I just want to create a struct that will store data permenantly inside a contract. According to the doc I need storage for that.
But the following code is not compiling except if I use memory instead. Why?
pragma solidity ^0.4.11;
contract test {
struct Selling {
address addr;
string name;
uint price;
}
mapping(string => Selling) selling;
function sellName() constant returns (bool ok)
{
address a = 0x4c3032756d5884D4cAeb2F1eba52cDb79235C2CA;
Selling storage myStruct = Selling(a,"hey",12);
}
}
The error I get is this:
ERROR:
browser/test.sol:16:9: TypeError: Type struct test.Selling memory is not implicitly convertible to expected type struct test.Selling storage pointer.
Selling storage myStruct = Selling(a,"hey",12);
^--------------------------------------------^
When you first create the myStruct instance, it will be created in memory and then written out to storage (assuming you put the object into your selling map and don't declare your method constant) when the function returns. If you were to retrieve the item from your map in another function, then you would declare it as a storage variable.
See this explanation on Ethereum StackExchange for more details. The Solidity documentation also has a very good explanation of how variables are stored and when to use memory vs storage.
I had similiar situation, the fix for this was:
function sellName() constant returns (bool ok)
{
address a = 0x4c3032756d5884D4cAeb2F1eba52cDb79235C2CA;
Selling memory myStruct = Selling(a,"hey",12);
// insert 'myStruct' to the mapping:
selling[a] = myStruct;
}