Super.init() caller - Revision history

Zhell at 06:13, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T06:13:00Z

Zhell at 06:10, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T06:10:06Z

Zhell at 05:59, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:59:59Z

Zhell at 05:59, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:59:25Z

Zhell at 05:51, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:51:16Z

Zhell at 05:50, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:50:45Z

Zhell at 05:50, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:50:26Z

Zhell at 05:49, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:49:57Z

Zhell at 05:49, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:49:38Z

Zhell at 05:49, 1 February 2026

2026-02-01T05:49:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:13, 1 February 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:


−	Full Code you can test (just comment the init() entirely in TokenA) to see the difference in logs while running it:	+	Full Code you can test, just comment the init() entirely in TokenA to see the difference in logs while running it:

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:10, 1 February 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~Redefining~~ init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:	+	When you extend Token, redefining init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:

	- "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)		- "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)

@@ Line 148: / Line 148: @@
 async function _main() {
      const owner = run.owner.address
-     await displayTokensOnAddress(owner, run)
+     await displayTokensOnAddress()
      TokenA = run.deploy(TokenA)
@@ Line 159: / Line 159: @@
      await run.sync()
-     await displayTokensOnAddress(owner, run)
+     await displayTokensOnAddress()
+}

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 <syntaxhighlight lang="javascript">
 const Run = require('../../libs/run.0.6.44.node.min.js');
-const { runMain, log, displayTokensOnAddress } = require('../helpers.js');
+const log = console.log
 let run = new Run({ network: 'mock', trust: 'state' })
@@ Line 134: / Line 134: @@
 TokenA.currency = 'TokenA'
@@ Line 152: / Line 162: @@
+}
-runMain(_main, run, null)
+_main()
 </syntaxhighlight>
 [[Category:Issues]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:51, 1 February 2026
Line 14:		Line 14:


−	Note that despite these issues, it works ~~nontheless~~, since it detects as 'sending' instead of 'minting', which manages to still pass the check and mint the token.	+	Note that despite these issues, it works nonetheless, since it detects the situation as 'sending' instead of 'minting', which manages to still pass the check and mint the token.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Redefining init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:
 - "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)
 - 'caller' variable which should be the class TokenA, but becomes instead:

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Redefining init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:
-      - "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)
+- "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)
-      - 'caller' variable which should be the class TokenA,
+- 'caller' variable which should be the class TokenA, but becomes instead:
-         but becomes instead: <syntaxhighlight lang="javascript">Object <Object <Object <Object <Complex prototype>>>> {
                  location: 'error://Undeployed',
                  origin: 'error://Undeployed',

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
                  satoshis: undefined
              }</syntaxhighlight>
-      Note that despite these issues, it works nontheless, since it detects as 'sending' instead of 'minting',
-      which manages to still pass the check and mint the token.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:49, 1 February 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~<br></div><div><div><div>~~Redefining init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:~~</div><div>     ~~ - "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)~~</div><div>     ~~ - 'caller' variable which should be the class TokenA,~~</div><div>         ~~but becomes instead: Object ~~<~~Object ~~<~~Object ~~<~~Object ~~<~~Complex prototype~~>>>> {</div~~>~~<div~~>~~               ~~ location: 'error://Undeployed',~~</div><div>               ~~ origin: 'error://Undeployed',~~</div><div>               ~~ nonce: 0,~~</div><div>               ~~ owner: 'mo61dRQheTcBMf1d7UEv91ybaDqXUyKUwd',~~</div><div>               ~~ satoshis: undefined~~</div><div>           ~~ }</~~div><div~~>~~     ~~ Note that despite these issues, it works nontheless, since it detects as 'sending' instead of 'minting',~~</div><div>     ~~ which manages to still pass the check and mint the token.~~</div></div></div><div></div><div>~~Full Code you can test (just comment the init() entirely in TokenA) to see the difference in logs while running it:~~</div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>~~	+	Redefining init() with a call to super.init() inside causes issues:
		+	- "minting = false, sending = true" (should be the opposite)
		+	- 'caller' variable which should be the class TokenA,
		+	but becomes instead: <syntaxhighlight lang="javascript">Object <Object <Object <Object <Complex prototype>>>> {
		+	location: 'error://Undeployed',
		+	origin: 'error://Undeployed',
		+	nonce: 0,
		+	owner: 'mo61dRQheTcBMf1d7UEv91ybaDqXUyKUwd',
		+	satoshis: undefined
		+	}</syntaxhighlight>
		+	Note that despite these issues, it works nontheless, since it detects as 'sending' instead of 'minting',
		+	which manages to still pass the check and mint the token.
		+
		+
		+
		+	Full Code you can test (just comment the init() entirely in TokenA) to see the difference in logs while running it: