Replies: 2 comments
-
|
Yep; fully agree that Let's wait for the audit to finish, and I will try to include this in the post-audit changes. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Implemented via #118. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
The v4.0.0-beta.5 update replaced the proxy mapping accessor. What used to be a dedicated
getProxymethod has now been replaced by an auto-generated getter calledproxies.I'd suggest reverting back to an explicit
getProxy(orproxyOf) method.While the name of the variable is still contextually correct, when used as a getter it implies plurality. When queried/read, the contract interface should make it clear that a user holds a single
proxynot multipleproxies.Example of the API as shown on Etherscan
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions