Support for require reason

[tlxnithin]

Hi ,

As of Solidity 0.4.22, we can have string reasons as part of require or revert functions. But this seems to be not supported in Geth. Here is the reference.

So is it true the Geth doesn't support it yet? I have been using Geth 1.8.16 Linux. Have checked the latest change log for 1.8.20. Couldn't find anything on that.

Is Geth going to provide this soon if not already? If providing already, may I know which version I can use?

Is there any work around I can come up with?

Here is my etherum stack exchange question.

[tlxnithin]

Does anybody have information on this?

[0xsarvesh]

This feature will definitely save a lot of development and debugging effort. 👍

[holiman]

So, geth is an ethereum client. revert/require are using the new (well, from Byzantium) EIP 206 instruction REVERT, which provides ends the execution in a 'cheap throw' and returns some data.

However, the data returned does not wind up in the logs, so it's not accessible from the outer scope of the transaction. It might be that you are requesting something like this: #15508 . However, I'm not quite sure what it would mean to "support" it -- I guess that depends on the usecase you have in mind.

If we can agree with others (Parity, Ganache, etc) what is needed, that would make it actionable.

[tlxnithin]

I have read that Ganache and Truffle already have this. Parity is yet to implement this.
I hope you understood what I am looking for. "Support" might not be the right word as you said, I just need the require string reason to be accessible by clients like Web3, ether.js.

I hope this gives the idea of what I am looking for. Stackoverflow Question.

[vlmold]

any progress on this?

[stevenlcf]

In case you are looking for it, there is a similar issue (feature request) in parity: openethereum/parity-ethereum#8068

[holiman]

Ah now I get it. So essentially, our tracers are just javascript code. It should be fairly simple to add the reason into the call-struct. I'll assign this to @karalabe for now , as he's the original author of the calltracer

[pcowgill]

@karalabe If you prefer, we could consider using https://gitcoin.co/requests to get this issue funded.

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

This issue now has a funding of 700.0 DAI (700.0 USD @ $1.0/DAI) attached to it.

• If you would like to work on this issue you can 'start work' on the Gitcoin Issue Details page.
• Want to chip in? Add your own contribution here.
• Questions? Checkout Gitcoin Help or the Gitcoin Slack
• $141,526.33 more funded OSS Work available on the Gitcoin Issue Explorer

[gitcoinbot]

Issue Status: 1. Open 2. Started 3. Submitted 4. Done

---

Workers have applied to start work.

These users each claimed they can complete the work by 5 months from now.
Please review their action plans below:

1) daniyal-24 has applied to start work (Funders only: approve worker | reject worker).

testing testing testing testing testing testing testing testing testing testing testing testing
2) alexjg has applied to start work (Funders only: approve worker | reject worker).

I'm interested in working on this but I'm not entirely sure what exactly the requested feature is. Is the idea to write a new built in tracer which nicely prints the argument to REVERT?

Learn more on the Gitcoin Issue Details page.

[pcowgill]

@karalabe If you prefer, we could consider using https://gitcoin.co/requests to get this issue funded.

I ended up submitting it, and it got funded! Thanks, @ceresstation!

[spm32]

@pcowgill do you have a preference regarding who takes on this issue?