Block identifier parameter in Contract.call
See original GitHub issue- Version: 3.16.2
- Python: 3.5
- OS: linux
What was wrong?
I’m trying to query a contract state 6 block ago. Unlike web3.js api in Contract.call I can’t specify block identifier to run this call against.
What is a correct way of doing this in web3py?
Am I correct in my understanding that as a workaround I can temporarily set Eth.defaultBlock
to desired number and I won’t run into any internal web3py thread/green thread concurrency issues?
How can it be fixed?
I’m feature-requesting addition of block identifier parameter in Contract.call in accord with web3.js api.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:8 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Contracts — Web3.py 6.0.0-beta.5 documentation
Smart contracts are programs deployed to the Ethereum network. ... The block_identifier parameter is passed directly to the call at the end portion...
Read more >Units and Globally Available Variables - Solidity
When contracts are evaluated off-chain rather than in context of a transaction included in a block, you should not assume that block.* and...
Read more >The `blocklog` Contract | Shimmer Wiki
Returns a list with the IDs of all requests in the block with block index n . Parameters. n (optional uint32 ):The block...
Read more >What is block processing - Nethereum Documentation
One-off data retrieval; Inter-contract calls; Currently the processor can't ... Process block and cancel http://playground.nethereum.com/csharp/id/1022 ...
Read more >OPERA Controls — Blocks
AUTOLOAD CONTRACT GRID PARAMETER. [AUTOLOAD_CONTRACT_GRID]. When active, the Original Grid is auto loaded into Contract grid. User has an option to 'Stop Auto ......
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
I’d say extra optional parameter.
Yes, this should be added (and should be relatively easy to implement)