Skip to content
New issue

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

how to check PAYMENT_PLUGIN is AINPayment contract #4

Open
jakepyo opened this issue Apr 7, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

how to check PAYMENT_PLUGIN is AINPayment contract #4

jakepyo opened this issue Apr 7, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jakepyo
Copy link
Contributor

jakepyo commented Apr 7, 2023

In my first glance, I was thinking the way by checking paymentPlugin_.ainft value is same with
this contract's address. just value comparision. that's all.

Originally posted by @minho-comcom-ai in #3 (comment)

@jakepyo jakepyo changed the title In my first glance, I was thinking the way by checking paymentPlugin_.ainft value is same with this contract's address. just value comparision. that's all. how to check PAYMENT_PLUGIN is AINPayment contract Apr 7, 2023
@dlgochan dlgochan self-assigned this Apr 9, 2023
@jakepyo
Copy link
Contributor Author

jakepyo commented Apr 10, 2023

As @minho-comcom-ai said, checking the value of PAYMENT_PLUGIN.ainft is same as this.address(AINFT721) is needed.

However, to compare the values, it seems to be overhead that change type of PAYMENT_PLUGIN from address to AINPayment to ONLY get ainft address. Is there any better option to check this values? If not, I will change this type to AINPayment as @minho-comcom-ai said.

@minho-comcom-ai
Copy link

Aha, changing type from address to AINPayment could be necessary for accessing the internal values. Hmm.. let me give a try.

@dlgochan dlgochan removed their assignment Apr 11, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants