feat: evm proxy contract and checksum #1242
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
6 Skipped Deployments
|
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces enhancements in address validation and formatting across the codebase. Major changes include replacing direct type assertions with parsing via Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant C as Component
participant H as useFormatAddresses Hook
participant CApp as useCelatoneApp
participant F as formatHexAddress
participant U as Address Formatter (unpadHexAddress / toChecksumAddress)
C->>H: Invoke useFormatAddresses
H->>CApp: Retrieve chain configuration ("move" feature)
CApp-->>H: Return feature flag
H->>F: Call formatHexAddress with flag
F->>U: Conditionally call unpadHexAddress (if move enabled) or toChecksumAddress
U-->>F: Return formatted address
F-->>H: Return address parsed via zHexAddr.parse
H-->>C: Provide final formatted address
sequenceDiagram
participant U as User
participant O as EvmContractDetailsOverview
participant T as OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds
U->>O: Request contract details
O->>O: Check evmVerifyInfo and proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo status
alt Proxy Verified
O->>T: Render proxy target commands component
else
O->>O: Render standard verified commands view
end
O-->>U: Display updated contract details and commands
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure. 🔧 ESLint
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/helpers.tsOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 8.57.1 ESLint couldn't find the plugin "eslint-plugin-react". (The package "eslint-plugin-react" was not found when loaded as a Node module from the directory "".) It's likely that the plugin isn't installed correctly. Try reinstalling by running the following: The plugin "eslint-plugin-react" was referenced from the config file in ".eslintrc.json". If you still can't figure out the problem, please stop by https://eslint.org/chat/help to chat with the team. src/lib/types/evm.tsOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 8.57.1 ESLint couldn't find the plugin "eslint-plugin-react". (The package "eslint-plugin-react" was not found when loaded as a Node module from the directory "".) It's likely that the plugin isn't installed correctly. Try reinstalling by running the following: The plugin "eslint-plugin-react" was referenced from the config file in ".eslintrc.json". If you still can't figure out the problem, please stop by https://eslint.org/chat/help to chat with the team. src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-write/index.tsxOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 8.57.1 ESLint couldn't find the plugin "eslint-plugin-react". (The package "eslint-plugin-react" was not found when loaded as a Node module from the directory "".) It's likely that the plugin isn't installed correctly. Try reinstalling by running the following: The plugin "eslint-plugin-react" was referenced from the config file in ".eslintrc.json". If you still can't figure out the problem, please stop by https://eslint.org/chat/help to chat with the team.
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (7)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (7)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds.tsx (1)
40-46: Consider adding a tooltip for the verification icon.Adding a tooltip would improve user experience by explaining what the verification icon means.
<CustomIcon name="verification-solid" boxSize={4} color="secondary.main" + title="Contract is verified" />src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx (1)
114-136: Improve error handling for proxy contract verification.The proxy contract UI section should handle the case where
proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfoexists but is not verified.Consider adding an error state:
- {!!proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified && ( + {!!proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo && ( <Stack gap={1} mb={8}> + {!proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo.isVerified && ( + <Text color="text.error">Proxy target contract is not verified</Text> + )} <Flex gap={2} align="center">
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (19)
CHANGELOG.md(1 hunks)src/lib/hooks/useFormatAddresses.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/account-details/components/nfts/NftsSectionSequencer.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/account-details/hooks/useAccountRedirect.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/contract-details/components/ContractTop.tsx(3 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/EvmContractDetailsTop.tsx(5 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewProxyTargetInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedCmds.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/index.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx(3 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx(7 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/utils.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/services/move/module/index.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/services/move/resource/index.ts(4 hunks)src/lib/services/searchService.ts(3 hunks)src/lib/services/types/tx.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/utils/address.ts(5 hunks)src/lib/utils/evm.ts(4 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- src/lib/pages/contract-details/components/ContractTop.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (40)
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedCmds.tsx (3)
1-11: LGTM! Clean imports and well-defined types.The imports are properly organized and the interface is well-typed with
HexAddr20andEvmVerifyInfo.
13-18: LGTM! Clean and efficient implementation.The component efficiently categorizes ABI operations and maintains a clean implementation without unnecessary complexity.
19-50:✅ Verification successful
Verify theme color and approve responsive layout.
The UI structure implements responsive design effectively and maintains a clear visual hierarchy. However, let's verify that the color token "secondary.main" exists in the theme.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for theme configuration files echo "Searching for theme configuration files..." fd -e ts -e js -e json "theme|colors" src # Search for "secondary.main" color token usage echo "Searching for secondary.main color token usage..." rg "secondary.main" -A 2 -B 2Length of output: 9759
Theme token verified; UI layout approved.
- The color token
"secondary.main"is confirmed to be defined and used consistently in the theme (e.g., insrc/lib/styles/theme/components/button.tsand other component style files).- The responsive layout and visual hierarchy using Chakra UI components are implemented correctly.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/EvmContractDetailsTop.tsx (3)
13-15: Interface extension looks good.
These additions forevmVerifyInfo,proxyTargetAddress, andproxyTargetEvmVerifyInfoallow rendering more comprehensive contract verification data and proxy targeting details.
77-97: Proxy contract details implementation is well-structured.
Conditionally displaying the implementation address and associated verification status is straightforward. Just ensure upstream data (e.g.,proxyTargetAddress) is always a valid, parsable address to prevent any unexpected behavior in external explorers.
100-136: Conditional Read/Write display is consistent.
Showing the read/write buttons only when the contract is verified aligns with common practice, preventing users from interfacing with an unverified ABI. This approach is user-friendly and lowers risks of invalid interaction attempts.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewProxyTargetInfo.tsx (2)
7-10: Strong prop typing.
DefiningproxyTargetAddressHexandproxyTargetEvmVerifyInfoin their own interface is helpful for clarity and maintainability.
12-43: New component cleanly renders proxy details.
This modular approach is well-structured, providing dedicated rendering for proxy target information, including Explorer links and verification icons. The code effectively checksisVerifiedbefore rendering the “verification-solid” icon.src/lib/hooks/useFormatAddresses.ts (3)
13-18: Appropriate feature-flag approach.
Conditionally usingunpadHexAddressfor Move chains andtoChecksumAddressotherwise keeps address formatting flexible and consistent with chain-specific requirements.
22-28: Helper function extraction is good practice.
formatHexAddressencapsulates chain-specific logic, improving readability and making it simpler to adapt if more chain conditions arise.
34-44: Improved validation with zod parsers.
Replacing direct type casting withzHexAddr.parseandzBechAddr.parseprovides robust validations, catching bad data earlier. The fallback to checksum formatting ensures consistent representation for EVM chains.src/lib/pages/account-details/hooks/useAccountRedirect.ts (2)
9-14: LGTM! Good practice using explicit type imports.The explicit type imports improve code readability and maintainability.
32-32: LGTM! Safer address handling with parsing.Replacing type casting with
zHexAddr20.parseis a better approach as it validates the address format at runtime.src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/utils.ts (2)
2-2: LGTM! Good practice importing checksum utility.The
toChecksumAddressimport adds important address validation functionality.
20-20: LGTM! Enhanced address validation with checksum.The combination of
zHexAddr20.parseandtoChecksumAddressensures proper address validation and formatting.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds.tsx (2)
10-13: LGTM! Well-defined props interface.The props interface clearly defines the required types for the component.
21-22: LGTM! Safe handling of optional ABI data.Good use of optional chaining and default empty array to prevent runtime errors.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/index.tsx (2)
19-19: LGTM! Clean import of new component.The import follows the established pattern in the file.
73-78: LGTM! Clear conditional rendering logic.The component is only rendered when the proxy target is verified, which is the correct behavior.
src/lib/services/move/resource/index.ts (2)
9-10: LGTM! Enhanced type safety with zHexAddr.The switch from type casting to using
zHexAddrparser improves runtime validation of addresses.
43-43: Consistent use of address parsing.Good use of
zHexAddr.parse()for validating addresses across all instances. This ensures addresses are properly validated before being used.Also applies to: 52-52, 72-72
src/lib/pages/account-details/components/nfts/NftsSectionSequencer.tsx (2)
9-14: LGTM! Improved type imports organization.Good organization of type imports and addition of
zHexAddr32for address validation.
80-80: Enhanced address validation for collection addresses.Using
zHexAddr32.parse()ensures collection addresses are properly validated before being used in the UI.src/lib/utils/address.ts (2)
12-12: LGTM! Consistent address validation.Good use of
zHexAddr.parse()across all address transformation functions, ensuring consistent validation.Also applies to: 38-38, 41-41, 44-44
86-113:✅ Verification successful
Verify empty string handling in toChecksumAddress.
The function returns an empty string when the keccak hash matches a specific value. Please verify this behavior aligns with EIP-55 checksum address specification.
🌐 Web query:
What does EIP-55 specify for handling empty strings in checksum address calculation?💡 Result:
EIP-55 does not directly handle empty strings in checksum calculations because its specification requires valid 40-character hexadecimal addresses as input. The standard operates under these key constraints:
Address Structure
Ethereum addresses must be 40 hex characters prefixed with0x, making empty strings invalid by definition[2][6].Checksum Process
The algorithm:
- Removes the
0xprefix- Converts remaining characters to lowercase
- Computes Keccak-256 hash of this normalized string[1][7]
- Uses hash bits to determine uppercase letters in final checksum[3][8]
Edge Case Implications
While not explicitly mentioned in EIP-55 documentation[1][7], an empty input would fail at multiple stages:
- Length validation (minimum 40 chars required after
0xremoval)- Hashing step would process zero-length input as
keccak256("")
This produces fixed hashc5d246...d85a470per Ethereum Yellow Paper[2], but since empty input isn't a valid address format, this scenario never occurs in proper implementations.The specification implicitly assumes non-empty inputs through its requirement for standard Ethereum address formatting[1][3][7]. Wallet implementations typically validate address length before applying checksum logic[4][9].
Citations:
- 1: https://learnblockchain.cn/docs/eips/eip-1191.html
- 2: https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/latest/types.html
- 3: https://crypto.ro/en/news/unravelling-the-concept-understanding-ethereum-address-checksums/
- 4: https://www.ledger.com/blog/understanding-crypto-addresses-and-derivation-paths
- 5: https://cointelegraph.com/explained/ethereum-address-checksum-explained
- 6: https://docs.tatum.io/docs/introducing-blockchain-addresses
- 7: https://narteysarso.hashnode.dev/ethereum-address-encoding-and-verification-eip-55
- 8: https://web3py.readthedocs.io/en/v7.5.0/web3.eth.html
- 9: https://dev.to/hugaidas/understanding-checksums-in-ethereum-why-they-matter-for-web3-developers-2oee
- 10: Yet another cool checksum address encoding ethereum/EIPs#55
Clarification on Empty Input Handling in toChecksumAddress
After verifying with the EIP-55 specification, it’s clear that the standard only defines behavior for valid 40-character hexadecimal addresses (prefixed with "0x") and does not directly address empty strings. Since an empty input is already invalid by definition, the current implementation’s approach—returning an empty string when the keccak hash matches that of an empty input—serves as a safeguard for such invalid cases. This behavior is acceptable given that proper address validation (ensuring a 40-character hex string) should occur before invoking this function.
src/lib/utils/evm.ts (2)
3-3: LGTM! Added zHexAddr20 for EVM address validation.Good addition of
zHexAddr20for proper EVM address validation.
39-39:✅ Verification successful
Verify EVM address parsing from input data.
The code correctly uses
toChecksumAddresswithzHexAddr20.parse(), but please verify the slice operations for extracting addresses from input data:
- Line 39:
input.slice(34, 74)for TransferErc20- Line 49: Direct use of
contractAddressfor Create- Line 60: Direct use of
contractAddressfrom logs for CallErc20FactoryAlso applies to: 49-49, 60-60, 68-68
🌐 Web query:
What are the standard positions for addresses in EVM transaction input data for ERC20 transfer method?💡 Result:
In Ethereum ERC-20 token transfers using the
transfermethod, addresses and values are encoded in specific positions within transaction input data:Input Data Structure
The input data for an ERC-20
transfercall follows this hexadecimal format:0xa9059cbb // Method ID (4 bytes) 000000000000000000000000<recipient_address> // Recipient address (32 bytes) 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000<value> // Transfer amount (32 bytes)Key Positions
Recipient Address
- Starts at byte position 4 (after Method ID)
- Occupies 32 bytes total
- Padded with leading zeros to fill 32 bytes
Example:
0x311d373126efae95e261deff004ff245021739d1becomes
000000000000000000000000311d373126efae95e261deff004ff245021739d1Transfer Value
- Starts at byte position 36 (after Method ID + address)
- Occupies 32 bytes as a
uint256value- Encoded in hexadecimal with leading zeros
Example:
600.856457 USDT (0x23d05789in hex) becomes
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000023d05789Technical Breakdown
Component Byte Range Length Encoding Rule Method ID 0-3 4 First 4 bytes of SHA3("transfer(address,uint256)") Recipient 4-35 32 Left-padded to 32 bytes Value 36-67 32 Left-padded hexadecimal integer This structure derives from Ethereum's ABI encoding specifications[1][3][7]. All ERC-20 compliant contracts follow this format for standard token transfers[3][7][10].
Citations:
- 1: https://info.etherscan.com/understanding-transaction-input-data/
- 2: https://dev.to/nazhmudin/transactions-data-decoding-and-human-readable-visualisation-elj
- 3: https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/2.x/api/token/ERC20
- 4: https://docs.goldsky.com/mirror/guides/token-transfers/ERC-20-transfers
- 5: https://docs.alchemy.com/docs/understanding-the-transaction-object-on-ethereum
- 6: https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/transactions/
- 7: https://goethereumbook.org/en/transfer-tokens/
- 8: https://www.quicknode.com/guides/ethereum-development/transactions/ethereum-transaction-calldata
- 9: https://trezor.io/learn/a/ethereum-internal-transactions
- 10: https://learnevm.com/chapters/fn/calldata
EVM Address Parsing Verified
After reviewing the ERC-20 transfer input data standard, the slicing operation on line 39 is correct. Given that the full recipient field is 32 bytes (64 hex characters) with left-padding, slicing
input.slice(34, 74)effectively extracts the actual 20-byte (40 hex characters) address from the padded field.
- Line 39: The slice operation correctly obtains the recipient address from the ERC20 transfer data.
- Line 49 & 60 (and 68): Directly using the provided
contractAddressfor Create and Call operations is acceptable provided these addresses are already validated and checksummed.No changes are necessary regarding how the address extraction is performed based on the ERC-20 ABI encoding specifications.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx (3)
22-28: LGTM! Props interface changes improve type safety.The changes to
InteractEvmContractPropsinterface enhance type safety by usingOption<EvmVerifyInfo>instead of direct ABI array. This provides better control over verification status and proxy information.
50-52: LGTM! ABI categorization uses verification info.The change to use
evmVerifyInfo?.abifor ABI categorization is correct and aligns with the new verification-based approach.
44-46:✅ Verification successful
Verify proxy contract interaction logic.
The condition for proxy interaction has been updated to handle both verification status and proxy type. Please ensure that this change doesn't affect existing proxy contracts.
Run the following script to verify the proxy contract handling:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for proxy contract interactions to ensure compatibility. # Test: Search for proxy contract usage patterns rg -A 5 'isAsProxy|proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo'Length of output: 23981
Proxy Contract Interaction Logic Verified
After executing the verification script, the usage of the
isAsProxycondition appears consistent across the codebase. In particular, the condition:const isAsProxy = !evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified || (!!proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified && selectedType.endsWith("proxy"));is utilized in multiple files (e.g., in the
interact-evm-contractcomponent, as well as in overview components) to correctly determine proxy interaction. This updated logic adequately handles both verification status and proxy type, and no conflicting behavior was observed for existing proxy contracts.No further changes are required based on the current analysis.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx (3)
27-27: LGTM! Import statement includes address utilities.The addition of
toChecksumAddressimport improves address handling consistency.
68-75: LGTM! Loading state renamed for clarity.The change from
isLoadingtoisFetchingbetter represents the asynchronous state.
151-154:❓ Verification inconclusive
Verify Read/Write tab visibility logic.
The condition for showing the Read/Write tab has been updated to check both contract and proxy target verification status.
Run the following script to verify the tab visibility logic:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for Read/Write tab visibility conditions. # Test: Search for tab visibility patterns rg -A 5 'hidden.*evmVerifyInfo|hidden.*proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo'Length of output: 66
Action Required: Confirm Read/Write Tab Visibility Behavior
The updated logic:
hidden={ !evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified && !proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified }appears to implement the intended behavior—making the Read/Write tab visible if either the contract or the proxy target is verified (i.e. the tab is hidden only when both are unverified). However, our automated search (using the provided rg command) did not return any output for visibility conditions in the repository. This outcome prevents us from being fully confident that the logic is applied consistently in the codebase.
Next Steps:
- Please manually verify in src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx (lines 151–154) that the Read/Write tab visibility behaves as expected.
- Confirm that any changes to verification statuses elsewhere in the component do not inadvertently override this behavior.
- Double-check that no additional conditions affect the visibility of the Read/Write tab that might conflict with this logic.
src/lib/services/move/module/index.ts (2)
26-36: LGTM! Import syntax updated for better type handling.The changes to import syntax improve type handling by explicitly marking type imports.
169-169: LGTM! Address parsing uses proper validation.The change from type casting to
zHexAddr.parseensures proper address validation.src/lib/services/types/tx.ts (2)
438-464: LGTM! Transaction schema includes address validation.The transformation of
fromandtoaddresses usingtoChecksumAddressensures consistent address format.
466-487: LGTM! Receipt schema maintains consistent address handling.The receipt schema follows the same address transformation pattern, ensuring consistency across the codebase.
src/lib/services/searchService.ts (2)
12-12: LGTM! New imports enhance address validation capabilities.The additions of
zHexAddr20,isHex20Bytes, andtoChecksumAddressimprove the robustness of address handling.Also applies to: 16-16, 23-23
360-363: LGTM! Proper EVM address handling with checksum.The conditional checksum conversion for EVM addresses enhances address format consistency.
CHANGELOG.md (1)
82-82: LGTM! Changelog entry follows the standard format.The entry is properly placed under "Improvements" and includes the PR number and a clear description.
| @@ -149,13 +151,13 @@ export const useSearchHandler = ( | |||
| /// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////// | |||
|
|
|||
| const { data: nftData, isFetching: nftFetching } = useNftByNftAddressLcd( | |||
| debouncedKeyword as HexAddr32, | |||
| zHexAddr32.parse(debouncedKeyword), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Verification agent
🧩 Analysis chain
Verify NFT data parsing error handling.
The change from direct casting to zHexAddr32.parse() improves type safety, but we should ensure proper error handling when parsing fails.
Run this script to check for error handling in NFT-related functions:
Also applies to: 160-160
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for try-catch blocks or error handling around zHexAddr32.parse
rg -A 5 "zHexAddr32\.parse" Length of output: 1508
Action Required: Add Error Handling for NFT Data Parsing
While changing to zHexAddr32.parse() does improve type safety, our search shows that neither src/lib/services/searchService.ts (lines 154 and 160) nor the NFT-related usage in src/lib/pages/account-details/components/nfts/NftsSectionSequencer.tsx include explicit error handling (e.g., try-catch blocks) around the parse calls. Please consider adding proper error handling to gracefully manage cases where parsing fails.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (14)
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ConstructorArgs.tsx (1)
49-63: Enhance validation and user guidance for constructor arguments.Consider the following improvements for better user experience:
- Add hex format validation for constructor arguments
- Provide more specific error messages
- Add helper text explaining the expected format
Apply this diff to implement the suggestions:
<ControllerTextarea backgroundColor="gray.900" name={`${name}.value` as FieldPath<T>} control={control} isRequired label="Constructor Arguments" - placeholder="ex.000000000000000000000000c005dc82818d67af737725bd4bf75435d065d239" + placeholder="e.g., 000000000000000000000000c005dc82818d67af737725bd4bf75435d065d239" variant="fixed-floating" labelBgColor="gray.900" + helperText="Enter constructor arguments as a hex string without '0x' prefix" error={ - constructorArgsValue === "" - ? "Invalid constructor arguments" + !constructorArgsValue + ? "Constructor arguments are required" + : !/^[0-9a-fA-F]+$/.test(constructorArgsValue) + ? "Constructor arguments must be a valid hex string without '0x' prefix" : undefined } />src/lib/services/evm/index.ts (2)
33-33: Consider enhancing error messages.The error messages could be more descriptive to help with debugging. Consider including additional context such as the chain ID or configuration details.
Example improvement:
- if (!evm.enabled) throw new Error("EVM is not enabled (useEvmParams)"); + if (!evm.enabled) throw new Error(`EVM is not enabled for chain ${chainConfig.chainId} (useEvmParams)`);Also applies to: 104-104, 133-134
36-43: Consider extracting common query configurations.Multiple hooks share similar query configurations. Consider extracting these into a shared constant or helper function to reduce duplication and maintain consistency.
Example implementation:
const DEFAULT_EVM_QUERY_CONFIG = { retry: false, refetchOnWindowFocus: false, refetchOnMount: false, } as const; // Usage in hooks { ...DEFAULT_EVM_QUERY_CONFIG, enabled: evm.enabled, ...options, }Also applies to: 54-59, 76-81, 107-114, 137-144
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/helpers.ts (1)
1-4: LGTM! Consider grouping related imports.The changes improve type safety by using type-only imports. The imports are correctly separated between type imports and value imports.
Consider grouping related imports from
lib/typestogether:-import type { HexAddr20, Option } from "lib/types"; -import { zHexAddr20 } from "lib/types"; -import type { EvmContractVerifyForm, EvmVerifyConfig } from "lib/types"; -import { EvmProgrammingLanguage } from "lib/types"; +import type { HexAddr20, Option, EvmContractVerifyForm, EvmVerifyConfig } from "lib/types"; +import { zHexAddr20, EvmProgrammingLanguage } from "lib/types";src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyOptions.tsx (1)
7-9: Rename interface to match component name.The interface name
EvmContractVerifyVyperPropsdoesn't match the component nameEvmContractVerifyOptions. This could be confusing as the interface is used for the options component, not just for Vyper-specific props.Apply this diff:
-interface EvmContractVerifyVyperProps { +interface EvmContractVerifyOptionsProps { control: Control<EvmContractVerifyForm>; }And update the component props:
-}: EvmContractVerifyVyperProps) => { +}: EvmContractVerifyOptionsProps) => {src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/EvmContractVerifyModalBody.tsx (1)
22-32: Consider using a more robust loading state implementation.The current implementation uses a setTimeout to simulate loading, which could lead to inconsistencies if the actual loading state changes during the timeout.
Consider using this pattern instead:
- const [fakeLoading, setFakeLoading] = useState(false); + const [showLoading, setShowLoading] = useState(false); useEffect(() => { - setFakeLoading(true); + if (isLoading) { + setShowLoading(true); + } else { + const timeoutId = setTimeout(() => { + setShowLoading(false); + }, 1500); - const timeoutId = setTimeout(() => { - setFakeLoading((newFakeLoading) => !newFakeLoading); - }, 1500); - - return () => clearTimeout(timeoutId); + return () => clearTimeout(timeoutId); + } }, [isLoading]);src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityHardhat.tsx (1)
29-31: Consider making Solidity version configurable.The hardcoded Solidity version in the Hardhat configuration template could lead to confusion if it doesn't match the actual contract's version.
Consider making it dynamic:
- solidity: "v0.8.28", // replace with your solidity version + solidity: "${useWatch({ control, name: 'compilerVersion' }) || 'v0.8.28'}", // dynamically use selected compiler versionsrc/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds.tsx (2)
21-22: Consider improving null safety handling.The optional chaining with nullish coalescing could be simplified.
- const { read: proxyTargetAbiRead, write: proxyTargetAbiWrite } = - categorizeAbi(proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.abi ?? []); + const { read: proxyTargetAbiRead, write: proxyTargetAbiWrite } = + categorizeAbi(proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo.abi);Since
proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfois required by the props interface, the optional chaining is unnecessary.
49-60: Consider matching parent component's responsive design.The parent component uses a column layout on mobile, but this component maintains a row layout which might cause inconsistency.
- <Flex gap={4} width="full"> + <Flex + gap={4} + width="full" + flexDirection={{ + base: "column", + md: "row", + }} + >src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx (3)
46-48: Verify proxy contract detection logic.The proxy detection logic has been updated to consider both verification states. However, the condition might be more readable with explicit parentheses.
Consider this more explicit version:
- !evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified || - (!!proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified && selectedType.endsWith("proxy")); + (!evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified) || + (proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified === true && selectedType.endsWith("proxy"));
52-54: Verify ABI access safety.The code safely handles undefined ABI with the nullish coalescing operator, but there's room for improvement in type safety.
Consider adding runtime type checking:
- const { read: abiRead, write: abiWrite } = categorizeAbi( - evmVerifyInfo?.abi ?? [] - ); + const { read: abiRead, write: abiWrite } = categorizeAbi( + Array.isArray(evmVerifyInfo?.abi) ? evmVerifyInfo.abi : [] + );
116-138: Verify proxy contract UI state handling.The proxy contract UI state handling looks good, with appropriate checks for verification status. However, consider adding a tooltip to explain why the switch is disabled.
Add a tooltip to improve UX:
<Switch isChecked={isAsProxy} onChange={handleSetIsAsProxy} isDisabled={!evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified} + title={!evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified ? "Contract must be verified to interact as proxy" : ""} />src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx (2)
107-113: Verify loading state completeness.The loading state checks are comprehensive, but consider adding a timeout to prevent infinite loading.
Consider adding a timeout using React Query's
staleTimeoption in the respective hooks:const { data: evmVerifyInfo, isFetching: isEvmVerifyInfoFetching } = useEvmVerifyInfo( contractAddress, { staleTime: 30000 } // 30 seconds );
147-150: Verify tab visibility logic.The tab visibility logic correctly considers both contract and proxy verification states. However, consider extracting this logic to a utility function for reusability and testing.
Consider this refactor:
const isReadWriteTabVisible = ( contractVerified?: boolean, proxyVerified?: boolean ): boolean => !!(contractVerified || proxyVerified); // Usage: hidden={!isReadWriteTabVisible( evmVerifyInfo?.isVerified, proxyTargetEvmVerifyInfo?.isVerified )}
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (91)
.eslintrc.json(1 hunks)src/config/theme/index.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/app-fns/tx/common/postEvm.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/app-fns/tx/common/sendingEvm.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/app-fns/tx/evm/requestEvm.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/app-provider/hooks/useSignAndBroadcastEvm.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/app-provider/tx/evm/requestEvm.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/ContractCmdButton.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/EstimatedFeeEvmRender.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/UserDocsLink.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/EditorFileBody.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/EditorSidebar.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/EditorTop.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/FullEditor.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/FullEditorSidebarMobile.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/helpers.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/editor/types.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/EvmAbiForm.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/BaseField.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/BoolField.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/Field.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/FieldTemplate.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/TupleField.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/types.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/utils.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-abi/utils.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/FailedDetails.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/InProgressDetails.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/EvmVerifyProcess.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/EvmVerifyRequestInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/utils.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractAbi.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractByteCode.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractCode.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractLibraryList.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/EvmContractCmdGroup.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/Optimizer.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewProxyTargetInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedCmds.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedProxyTargetCmds.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/index.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-read/ReadBox.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-read/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-write/WriteBox.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-write/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx(4 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/utils.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx(7 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ConstructorArgs.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ContractLibraries.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ContractLibrary.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyForms.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyOptions.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmVersionToTarget.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/OptimizerConfiguration.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/EvmContractVerifyModalBody.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/EvmContractVerifySuccessModal.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/index.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityContractCode.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityFoundry.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityHardhat.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityJsonInput.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityUploadFiles.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperContractCode.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperJsonInput.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperUploadFile.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/helpers.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/index.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/tx-details/components/TxInfo.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/tx-details/components/TxInfoMobile.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/services/chain-config/api.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/chain-config/index.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/index.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/eth.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/index.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/types.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/utils.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/services/tx/jsonRpc.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/tx/simulateFeeEvm.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/types/verification/evm.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/verification/evm/api.ts(2 hunks)src/lib/services/verification/evm/index.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/services/verification/evm/utils.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/types/evm.ts(1 hunks)src/lib/utils/evm.ts(4 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (65)
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractByteCode.tsx
- src/lib/components/UserDocsLink.tsx
- src/lib/components/editor/types.ts
- src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/eth.ts
- src/lib/types/evm.ts
- src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/utils.ts
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/utils.ts
- src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/types.ts
- src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/FailedDetails.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/BaseField.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ContractLibrary.tsx
- src/lib/components/editor/EditorSidebar.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewInfo.tsx
- src/lib/services/tx/jsonRpc.ts
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/EvmContractCmdGroup.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/BoolField.tsx
- src/lib/components/ContractCmdButton.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/utils.ts
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/Optimizer.tsx
- src/lib/app-fns/tx/common/postEvm.tsx
- src/lib/services/tx/simulateFeeEvm.ts
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractLibraryList.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperJsonInput.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-write/index.tsx
- src/lib/services/chain-config/index.ts
- src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/EvmVerifyProcess.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ContractLibraries.tsx
- src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/index.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityFoundry.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperContractCode.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/index.tsx
- src/lib/app-fns/tx/evm/requestEvm.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/OptimizerConfiguration.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/index.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/types.ts
- src/lib/pages/tx-details/components/TxInfo.tsx
- src/lib/services/chain-config/api.ts
- src/lib/components/editor/helpers.ts
- src/lib/app-provider/tx/evm/requestEvm.ts
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/EvmAbiForm.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/InProgressDetails.tsx
- src/lib/components/editor/EditorTop.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/index.tsx
- src/lib/components/editor/FullEditorSidebarMobile.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/FieldTemplate.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyForms.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/utils.ts
- src/lib/app-provider/hooks/useSignAndBroadcastEvm.ts
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/vyper/EvmContractVerifyVyperUploadFile.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityUploadFiles.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-write/WriteBox.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractCode.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityContractCode.tsx
- src/lib/components/EstimatedFeeEvmRender.tsx
- src/lib/services/verification/evm/index.ts
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/Field.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-read/index.tsx
- src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/index.ts
- src/lib/components/modal/evm-verify-status/EvmVerifyRequestInfo.tsx
- src/lib/components/evm-abi/fields/TupleField.tsx
- src/lib/services/types/verification/evm.ts
- src/lib/components/evm-verify-section/index.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityJsonInput.tsx
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/abi-read/ReadBox.tsx
- src/lib/services/verification/evm/api.ts
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- src/lib/utils/evm.ts
- src/lib/services/evm/json-rpc/proxy/utils.ts
- src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewProxyTargetInfo.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (25)
src/config/theme/index.ts (1)
5-5: LGTM! Good use of type-only import.The change to use
import typeis a good practice as it explicitly indicates thatOptionis used only for type checking, which helps with code clarity and bundle size optimization.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmVersionToTarget.tsx (2)
3-4: LGTM! Import statements are properly organized.The separation of type-only imports from value imports improves code clarity and follows TypeScript best practices.
Also applies to: 6-7
10-68: LGTM! Component implementation is robust and type-safe.The component demonstrates good practices:
- Generic type parameters for form values
- Proper type safety with react-hook-form
- Clear separation of UI and logic
- Helpful user guidance with descriptive text
src/lib/app-fns/tx/common/sendingEvm.tsx (1)
4-4: LGTM! Good TypeScript practice.Converting to a type-only import is appropriate here since
SimulatedFeeEvmis only used as a type annotation. This change helps with tree-shaking and makes the code's intent clearer.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-contract-info/ContractAbi.tsx (1)
2-2: LGTM! Good use of type-only import.The change to use a type-only import for
JsonFragmentis appropriate since it's only used for type annotations. This helps with tree-shaking and potentially reduces the bundle size.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedInfo.tsx (1)
3-3: LGTM! Good use of type-only import.The change to use a type-only import for
EvmVerifyInfois appropriate since it's only used for type annotations. This helps with tree-shaking and potentially reduces the bundle size..eslintrc.json (1)
29-36: Enforcing Consistent Type ImportsThe new rule
@typescript-eslint/consistent-type-importsis added correctly with appropriate options. The configuration enforces type-only imports with a clear and consistent style, aligning well with the PR objectives.src/lib/pages/tx-details/components/TxInfoMobile.tsx (1)
9-9: LGTM! Type-only import improves code clarity and bundle optimization.The change to use the
typekeyword for importingOptionandRatiotypes follows TypeScript best practices. This helps the bundler optimize the code by clearly indicating these imports are only used for type checking and will be erased at runtime.src/lib/components/editor/EditorFileBody.tsx (1)
1-3: LGTM! Good use of type-only imports.The changes follow TypeScript best practices by using
import typefor type-only imports. This helps reduce bundle size by ensuring types are removed during compilation.src/lib/components/editor/FullEditor.tsx (1)
3-3: LGTM! Good separation of type and value imports.The changes follow TypeScript best practices by:
- Using
import typefor type-only imports- Properly organizing imports by separating type imports from value imports
Also applies to: 7-7, 10-11
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/ConstructorArgs.tsx (1)
2-3: LGTM! Clean separation of type and value imports.The changes follow TypeScript best practices by clearly distinguishing between type imports and runtime value imports.
src/lib/services/evm/index.ts (2)
1-2: LGTM! Well-organized type imports.The changes improve type safety by properly distinguishing between type and value imports, following TypeScript best practices.
Also applies to: 10-11, 20-20
91-91: LGTM! Type-safe address parsing.The use of
zHexAddr20.parse()instead of direct type casting improves type safety and validation.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyOptions.tsx (1)
2-5: LGTM! Import changes improve type safety.The changes correctly separate type-only imports from value imports, improving type safety and clarity.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/index.tsx (1)
4-4: LGTM! Type-only import improves type safety.The change to use a type-only import for
EvmContractVerifyFormis a good practice as it ensures the type is not included in the runtime bundle.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/EvmContractVerifyModalBody.tsx (1)
7-7: LGTM! Type-only import improves type safety.The change to use a type-only import for
EvmContractVerifyFormis a good practice as it ensures the type is not included in the runtime bundle.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/solidity/EvmContractVerifySolidityHardhat.tsx (1)
6-10: LGTM! Import organization improves code clarity.The changes to separate type imports and organize imports logically improve code maintainability.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/evm-contract-verify-modal/EvmContractVerifySuccessModal.tsx (1)
19-19: LGTM! Type-only import improves type safety.The change to use a type-only import for
EvmContractVerifyFormis a good practice as it ensures the type is not included in the runtime bundle.src/lib/services/verification/evm/utils.ts (1)
2-3: LGTM! Good separation of type-only imports.The change to make
ContractLibrariesa type-only import is a good practice as it clarifies intent and potentially reduces bundle size.src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/OverviewVerifiedCmds.tsx (1)
1-7: LGTM! Good component refactoring.The changes improve the component by:
- Following single responsibility principle
- Using responsive design patterns correctly
- Maintaining clean imports and type declarations
Also applies to: 19-50
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/evm-contract-details-overview/index.tsx (1)
73-78: LGTM! Good separation of proxy target rendering.The conditional rendering of proxy target commands maintains a clean separation of concerns and follows the same pattern as the main verified commands section.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/components/interact-evm-contract/index.tsx (2)
4-4: LGTM! Clean import organization.The imports are well-organized, with types separated from React imports. The explicit type imports improve code clarity.
Also applies to: 6-8
24-30: Props interface update aligns with verification-based approach.The removal of
contractAbiin favor ofevmVerifyInfoandproxyTargetEvmVerifyInfoimproves the component's design by:
- Centralizing verification and ABI information
- Supporting proxy contract interactions
- Making the verification status explicit
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-details/index.tsx (2)
27-27: LGTM! Improved address handling with checksum support.The addition of
toChecksumAddressimport enhances address validation and display consistency.
235-238:✅ Verification successful
Verify address validation and conversion.
The checksum address conversion is correctly applied, but consider adding error handling for invalid addresses.
Let's verify the address validation:
Consider adding error handling:
- contractAddress={toChecksumAddress(validated.data.contractAddress)} + contractAddress={ + try { + toChecksumAddress(validated.data.contractAddress) + } catch (e) { + console.error('Invalid address format:', e); + validated.data.contractAddress // fallback to original + } + }
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other instances of address validation rg "isHexWalletAddress|toChecksumAddress" -A 2Length of output: 11445
Ensure address handling remains robust
After verifying the code, the conditional check using
!isHexWalletAddress(validated.data.contractAddress)in the same file already prevents invalid addresses from reaching thetoChecksumAddressconversion. This existing validation ensures that only properly formatted addresses are processed, so adding an extra try/catch block in the JSX layer is redundant. In short, the current approach is correct and no changes are necessary.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Improvements
These updates collectively enhance the transparency and reliability of contract information and address presentation to users.