Compare
Four documents, the same five questions.
No throughput league table and no yield. The cells are what this library is willing to say about the text.
| Question | Permit Extension for EIP-20 Signed Approvals |
|---|---|
| What the text proposes | ERC 2612, Permit Extension for EIP-20 Signed Approvals. Arguably one of the main reasons for the success of EIP-20 tokens lies in the interplay between approve and transferFrom, which allows for tokens to not only be transferred between externally owned accounts (EOA), but to be used in other contracts under application specific conditions by abstracting away msg.sender as the defining mechanism for token access control. |
| Who may write | Martin Lundfall |
| What is settled | Arguably one of the main reasons for the success of EIP-20 tokens lies in the interplay between approve and transferFrom, which allows for tokens to not only be transferred between externally owned accounts (EOA), but to be used in other contracts under application specific conditions by abstracting away msg.sender as the defining mechanism for token access control. |
| Load-bearing assumption | A gas or opcode change is not a throughput benchmark. It is a relative price and a validity rule. |
| What this library says afterwards | Status in the source: Final. A reading of the public specification, not a copy of it and not a certification. |
| Rights | Official external source only |