contract.filters passing an array as OR related topic filter

[jochenonline]

Is it possible to pass an array of topics (a.k.a. indexed values) to contract.filters.MyEvent() like I can do it to the members of filter.topics that is passed to provider.getLogs?

[ricmoo]

That functionality isn't supported yet. It is coming though. There is a TODO in the code to add it, and it is fairly straight forward. It is just a matter of sorting and serializing nested arrays. It probably won't make it into v4, as I'm trying to finalize v5 for beta release right now. I'll add it as an enhancement for v5 though, so it should get in soon. :)

[ricmoo]

This has been added to 5.0.0-beta.185 and shoaled work for both the Contract and Interface classes. :)

Thanks! :)

[EvilJordan]

I always feel bad commenting on closed issues, but it's often where the question and information is most relevant.

Contract.filters.Transfer([ [ null, '0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000' ], [ '0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000', null ] ])

I'm trying to listen to mint and burn transfers. I can make them work individually, as one-off filters.Transfer calls, but combining in this way results in the error: invalid address (argument="address", value=[null,"0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000"], code=INVALID_ARGUMENT, version=address/5.0.9)

As with most things in my life, I'm sure I've done something wrong, but I thought I was understanding the documentation and logic so well!

[ricmoo]

The .filters Contract method does not support OR-ed conditions, but I think the filter you are trying to create is quite different then the one that would represent. :)

That filter API you linked to is for the provider.getLogs, which is what the Contract.filters builds topic sets for. Keep in mind if you wish to use the provider.getLogs methods directly, you will need to pad the addresses to 32 bytes.

Off topic, but as a quick example of what that filter would match, if the Contract filter API supported that would be:

• [ null ] and [ null ] (so a transfer from any to any, this is not probably what you want)
• [ 0 ] and [ null ] (i.e. the mint, you care about this)
• [ null ] and [ 0 ] (i.e. the burn, you care about this)
• [0 ] and [ 0] (a mint and burn simultaneously; this prolly doesn't happen ;))

What you likely want is two separate filters:

const filterBurn = Contract.filters.Transfer(null, '0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000');
const filterMint = Contract.filters.Transfer('0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000', null);

The OR nature of filters gets away from you pretty quickly. It is a good idea for me to add filter address though. I will add that to my backlog for v6 which I'm tinkering with right now. :)

Does that make sense?

[EvilJordan]

This absolutely makes sense, and similar to what I tried at first, but now realize I wasn't creating multiple on() listeners, and instead overwriting the first one with the newest filter.

It's been a long week. As always, thank you for your help!

[ricmoo]

No worries. Glad to help! :)