We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Describe your issue here.
We deployed the contract UiPoolDataProvider https://github.com/pret-labs/pret-protocol/blob/master/contracts/misc/UiPoolDataProvider.sol to Aurora mainnet.
UiPoolDataProvider
When viewing the contract from the explorer (https://explorer.mainnet.aurora.dev/address/0x798687d303a3642B5994571AFf48627DE68276A7/read-contract), the interfaces and source code don't match with the deployed contract source code. We have confirmed that the contract code is correct, and when testing from other clients, the interfaces are correct.
The contract interfaces should match the contract source code
The decompiled contract is a completely different one
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
feat: Contract code on-demand fetcher (blockscout#9708)
25039ca
* Contract code on-demand fetcher * Review comments #1 * Review comments #2: ignore addresses with nonce * Review comments 3: fix threshold calculation * Refine trigger_fetch function * Skip updating retries number in case of failed eth_getCode response
No branches or pull requests
Describe your issue here.
Steps to reproduce
We deployed the contract
UiPoolDataProvider
https://github.com/pret-labs/pret-protocol/blob/master/contracts/misc/UiPoolDataProvider.sol to Aurora mainnet.When viewing the contract from the explorer (https://explorer.mainnet.aurora.dev/address/0x798687d303a3642B5994571AFf48627DE68276A7/read-contract), the interfaces and source code don't match with the deployed contract source code. We have confirmed that the contract code is correct, and when testing from other clients, the interfaces are correct.
Expected behaviour
The contract interfaces should match the contract source code
Actual behaviour
The decompiled contract is a completely different one
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: