I am triying to deploy mi ERC721 contract in my private Blockchian. This is the Smart Contract:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity >=0.4.22 <0.9.0;
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721.sol";
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/extensions/ERC721Enumerable.sol";
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/extensions/ERC721URIStorage.sol";
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/extensions/ERC721Burnable.sol";
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/access/Ownable.sol";
import "#openzeppelin/contracts/utils/Counters.sol";
contract MyToken is ERC721, ERC721Enumerable, ERC721URIStorage, ERC721Burnable, Ownable {
using Counters for Counters.Counter;
Counters.Counter private _tokenIdCounter;
constructor() ERC721("MyToken", "MTK") {}
function safeMint(address to, string memory uri) public onlyOwner {
uint256 tokenId = _tokenIdCounter.current();
_tokenIdCounter.increment();
_safeMint(to, tokenId);
_setTokenURI(tokenId, uri);
}
// The following functions are overrides required by Solidity.
function _beforeTokenTransfer(address from, address to, uint256 tokenId)
internal
override(ERC721, ERC721Enumerable)
{
super._beforeTokenTransfer(from, to, tokenId);
}
function _burn(uint256 tokenId) internal override(ERC721, ERC721URIStorage) {
super._burn(tokenId);
}
function tokenURI(uint256 tokenId)
public
view
override(ERC721, ERC721URIStorage)
returns (string memory)
{
return super.tokenURI(tokenId);
}
function supportsInterface(bytes4 interfaceId)
public
view
override(ERC721, ERC721Enumerable)
returns (bool)
{
return super.supportsInterface(interfaceId);
}
}
However, when running
truffle migrate --reset
I am getting the following error:
Error parsing #openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721.sol: ParsedContract.sol:54:28: ParserError: Expected primary expression.
interfaceId == type(IERC721).interfaceId ||
^--^
Compilation failed. See above.
This is not the first time in running this migration. However, it is the first time it is not succesful. Does anyone know why I am getting this error? Thanks
Related
I have two questions.
1) I am getting the following error:
TypeError: Contract "MyToken" should be marked as abstract.
--> contracts/MyToken.sol:8:1:
According to my understanding, contract should be abstract when there is a unimplemented function. Here I have the function foo. But still getting this error?
2) Also I want write a constructor which passes totalSupply_ to the contract. Is it possible to implement in the way I have done?
// SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
//import '#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/IERC20.sol';
import '#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol';
contract MyToken is ERC20 {
uint256 private _totalSupply;
string private _name;
string private _symbol;
constructor(string memory name_,string memory symbol_, uint totalSupply_ ) {
_name = name_;
_symbol = symbol_;
_totalSupply = totalSupply_;
}
function foo() external returns (uint) {
uint temp;
temp = 1+1;
return temp;
}
}
You are inheriting from ERC20 but you are not calling its constructor
constructor(string memory name_,string memory symbol_,uint totalSupply_)ERC20("name","SYM") {
_name = name_;
_symbol = symbol_;
_totalSupply = totalSupply_;
}
In your case you have to call ERC20("name","SYM") because ERC20 is inheriting from an abstract Context class.
contract ERC20 is Context, IERC20, IERC20Metadata {
if you did not inherit from Context you would not have to call ERC20("name","SYM")
contract ERC20 is IERC20, IERC20Metadata {
Since you are calling ERC20("name","SYM") you are actually setting name and symbol so you dont have to set them in MyToken constructor:
uint256 private _totalSupply;
constructor(uint totalSupply_ )ERC20("name","SYM") {
_totalSupply = totalSupply_;
}
Try this:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
//import '#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/IERC20.sol';
import '#openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol';
contract MyToken is ERC20 {
uint256 private _totalSupply;
constructor(string memory name_,string memory symbol_, uint totalSupply_ ) ERC20(name_, symbol_) {
_totalSupply = totalSupply_;
}
function foo() external returns (uint) {
uint temp;
temp = 1+1;
return temp;
}
}
When i get compile i get this error =ParserError: Expected '(' but got identifier
I am facing such an error, I tried many things but I could not do it. I want to make a small wallet and I want to run a withdraw function. I am waiting for your help.
strong text
// SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED
pragma solidity >= 0.7.0 <0.9.0;
contract Challenge0 {
address public owner;
uint256 userBalance;
uint256 withdrawAmount;
bool public canWithdraw= false;
constructor (address payable _withdrawAmount){
function withdrawAmount(uint256 amount) onlyOwner payable public {
require(msg.value == amount);
require(amount <= getBalance());
msg.sender.transfer(amount);
}
}
function setUserBalance()external view {
}
function getUserBalance()public returns (uint256){
return address(this).balance;
}
}
There are some errors in your smart contract:
In smart contract's constructor() you cannot declare a function. In your case you're declaring withdrawAmount() function into it. For resolve this, you must to move this function outside constructor;
You're using the same name for a withdrawAmount() function and uint256 variabile called withdrawAmount. The compiler give you error because you cannot use the same name for declaring a variabile and a function, thus you must to change one of these name with a different name;
withdrawAmount() has onlyOwner() modifier that you didn't declare into your smart contract. To solve this problem you must to declare it. More information about modifiers here;
You didn't declare and implement the getBalance() function in your contract;
When use transfer() function you must use it with payable address. In your case you must to cast the msg.sender address using payable() in this way:
payable(msg.sender).transfer(amount);
I tried to correct your smart contract, you can continue with this model:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity >= 0.7.0 <0.9.0;
contract Challenge0 {
address public owner;
uint256 userBalance;
uint256 withdrawAmountVariable;
bool public canWithdraw = false;
constructor() {
owner = msg.sender;
}
modifier onlyOwner() {
require(owner == msg.sender, "You aren't the smart contact's owner");
_;
}
function getBalance() public returns(uint) {
// TODO: implement your logic
}
function withdrawAmount(uint256 amount) onlyOwner payable public {
require(msg.value == amount);
require(amount <= getBalance());
payable(msg.sender).transfer(amount);
}
function setUserBalance()external view {
// TODO: implement your logic
}
function getUserBalance()public view returns (uint256){
return address(this).balance;
}
}
having a class which internally generates error msg and using static function of android,util.Log.i(String, String) to log the error (it could be some other static function to recored the failure).
class Util {
public static void handleIntent(Intent intent, String Tag, String failMsg) {
...
if (true) { // for test
String s = failMsg; //getError(failCode);
Log.i(Tag, s);
}
...
}
}
and the test is to verify the error message is logged (using mockito-inline 3.8.0):
#Test
public void test_log() {
try (MockedStatic<Log> logMock = Mockito.mockStatic(Log.class)) {
Intent intent = getIntent();
// test
Util.handleIntent(intent, "theTag", "+++TEST1");
// verify
Mockito.verify(logMock, times(1)).i(eq(theTag), eq("+++TEST1")); //<== does not compile
Log.i(eq("+++TEST1"), eq(dataStr));
}
}
how to mock the android.util.Log and verify its static android.util.Log.i(String, String) has been called with the string?
(powermock is not the option. it was using powermock and after update the mockito to 3.8.0 and powermock to 2.0.9, it starts to get a lot errors, and was suggested to replace the powermock with mockito-inline.)
You would add a "logMock.when" instruction before you test's instruction.
this works:
try (MockedStatic<Log> logMock = Mockito.mockStatic(Log.class)) {
// test
Util.handleIntent(intent, "theTag", "+++TEST1");
logMock.verify(() -> Log.i(eq("theTag"), eq("+++TEST1"), times(1));
}
I am trying to define some different mocked behaviours when a method is called with different parameters. Unfortunately, I find that the second time I try to mock the given method on a (mocked) class, it runs the actual method, causing an exception because the matchers are not valid parameters. Anyone know how I can prevent this?
manager = PowerMockito.mock(Manager.class);
try {
PowerMockito.whenNew(Manager.class).withArguments(anyString(), anyString())
.thenReturn(manager);
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl validFindAuthorityDescription = mock(FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl.class);
PowerMockito.when(manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest(anyString(), anyString())).thenCallRealMethod();
PowerMockito.when(manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest(Matchers.eq(VALID_IK),
Matchers.eq(VALID_CATEGORY_NAME))).thenReturn(validFindAuthorityDescription);
PowerMockito.when(manager.processRequest(Matchers.any(FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest.class)))
.thenThrow(ManagerException.class);
PowerMockito.when(manager.processRequest(Matchers.eq(validFindAuthorityDescription)))
.thenReturn(generateValidAuthorityDescriptionResponse());
The following code is a working example based on your mock setup (I've added dummy classes to make it runnable).
The code also contains asserts to verify that the mocked methods return expected values. Also, the real method createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest is only called once.
Note: This was tested with `powermock 2.0.7` and `mockito 2.21.0`.
If issues persist, I'd suggest checking if the real method is not additionally called from somewhere else in your program (other than the code quoted in your problem statement).
package com.example.stack;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.function.ThrowingRunnable;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito;
import org.powermock.core.classloader.annotations.PrepareForTest;
import org.powermock.modules.junit4.PowerMockRunner;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertThrows;
import static org.mockito.ArgumentMatchers.*;
import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.mock;
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(fullyQualifiedNames = "com.example.stack.*")
public class StackApplicationTests {
private static final String VALID_IK = "IK";
private static final String VALID_CATEGORY_NAME = "CATEGORY_NAME";
private static final Object VALID_RESPONSE = "RESPONSE";
#Test
public void test() {
Manager manager = mock(Manager.class);
try {
PowerMockito.whenNew(Manager.class).withArguments(anyString(), anyString())
.thenReturn(manager);
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl validFindAuthorityDescription = mock(FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl.class);
PowerMockito.when(manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest(anyString(), anyString())).thenCallRealMethod();
PowerMockito.when(manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest(eq(VALID_IK), eq(VALID_CATEGORY_NAME)))
.thenReturn(validFindAuthorityDescription);
PowerMockito.when(manager.processRequest(any(FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest.class)))
.thenThrow(ManagerException.class);
PowerMockito.when(manager.processRequest(eq(validFindAuthorityDescription)))
.thenReturn(VALID_RESPONSE);
// verify that the mock returns expected results
assertEquals(Manager.REAL_RESULT, manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest("any", "any"));
assertEquals(validFindAuthorityDescription, manager.createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest("IK", "CATEGORY_NAME"));
assertThrows(ManagerException.class, new ThrowingRunnable(){
#Override
public void run( ) {
manager.processRequest(new FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl());
}
});
assertEquals(VALID_RESPONSE, manager.processRequest(validFindAuthorityDescription));
}
}
interface FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest {}
class FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl implements FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest {}
class ManagerException extends RuntimeException {}
class Manager {
public static FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl REAL_RESULT = new FindAuthorityDescriptionRequestImpl();
public Manager(String s1, String s2) {}
public FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest createFindAuthorityDescriptionRequest(String ik, String category) {
return REAL_RESULT;
}
public Object processRequest(FindAuthorityDescriptionRequest request) {
return null;
}
}
I am using Solc version 0.7.0 installed by npm. When I try to create a Struct that contains mapping, I received an error: "Struct containing a (nested) mapping cannot be constructed."
Please check the code:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity 0.7.0;
contract Test {
struct Request {
uint256 value;
mapping(address => bool) approvals;
}
Request[] public requests;
...
function createRequest(
uint256 value
) public {
Request memory newRequest = Request({// here the compiler complains
value: value
});
requests.push(newRequest);
}
}
When I use older versions of solc, the code compiles without problems.
Thank you in advance!
This should work:
function createRequest(uint256 value) public {
Request storage newRequest = requests.push();
newRequest.value = value;
}
Cheers!
This worked in my case:
struct Request{
uint256 value;
mapping(address => bool) approvals;
}
uint256 numRequests;
mapping (uint256 => Request) requests;
function createRequest (uint256 value) public{
Request storage r = requests[numRequests++];
r.value= value;
}