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

Evaluate alternative token standards #6

Closed
goeddea opened this issue Jul 6, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Evaluate alternative token standards #6

goeddea opened this issue Jul 6, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@goeddea
Copy link
Contributor

goeddea commented Jul 6, 2018

We want to use a token standard that is widespread and accepted in the market - which at the moment is ERC20.

At the same time, newer token standards may provide features that we need/can use to make our life easier.

Candidates for evaluation:

@oberstet
Copy link
Member

oberstet commented Nov 6, 2018

the current token is using the zeppelin reference implementation: https://github.com/xbr/xbr-protocol/blob/master/contracts/XBRToken.sol

but I agree: the (unfixable) bugs in the ERC20 token (API) .. bad.

I've looked into both of the newer proposal you mention, and I am +1 on ERC777, and -1 on ERC223.

Reason: only ERC777 is backward compatible with ERC20.

@oberstet oberstet changed the title evaluate newer token standards Use ERC777 Nov 23, 2018
@oberstet oberstet changed the title Use ERC777 Evaluate alternative token standards Apr 14, 2019
@oberstet
Copy link
Member

see https://github.com/PhABC/ethereum-token-standards-list/blob/master/README.md for a bigger list.

because of #22, ERC-865 and ERC-965 are of particular interest.

@oberstet
Copy link
Member

Right now, we are using the standard/battle-tested openzeppelin erc20 token implementation (https://github.com/crossbario/xbr-protocol/blob/master/contracts/XBRToken.sol).

I don't think the additional features of alternative tokens justify the risks and hassles of migrating - at least for now. closing: won't fix (at this point)

@oberstet oberstet reopened this Sep 6, 2019
@oberstet oberstet added this to the Mark-II milestone Sep 27, 2019
@oberstet oberstet removed the Mark-II label Sep 27, 2019
@oberstet
Copy link
Member

so rgd the token used in markets: we have redesigned this, and now allow any ERC20 token as a means of payment when creating the market https://xbr.network/docs/protocol/api/index.html#createmarket

consequently, this issue is kinda void

@oberstet oberstet reopened this May 8, 2020
@oberstet
Copy link
Member

consequently, this issue is kinda void

it is, for market coins, but not the xbr network token


https://www.cointelligence.com/content/comparison-erc20-erc223-new-ethereum-erc777-token-standard/

@oberstet
Copy link
Member

we now have market specific coins

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants