fix: contract deployment and type issues for SDK compatibility #163
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fixed several issues related to contract handling and TS compatibility:
awaitfromFeeJuiceContract.at(...)-.at()returns a synchronous contract.TokenContract.deploy(...)to use an object instead of a list of arguments for the current SDK signature..deploy()calls to.deploy().send({ fee: ... })for proper fee handling.BigInt(e.g.,10 → 10n,0 → 0n) to match uint256 contract types.l1ClienttoanyinL1FeeJuicePortalManager.newto bypass TS type checks.changes ensure smooth deployment, correct typing, and full SDK compatibility.