Hadrien Croubois

``` function upgradeTo(address newImplementation) public virtual { _authorizeUpgrade(newImplementation); _setImplementation(newImplementation); } function _authorizeUpgrade(address newImplementation) internal virtual { _checkOwner(); } ``` would be backward compatible, and it would allow a dev to...

Any reason why someone with specific requirements would not write their own beacon ?

@pcaversaccio > Now given the changeset for this PR, you could override `previewRedeem` with a function that reverts and thus it disables `maxWithdraw` and is hence not anymore EIP-4626 compliant....

This is likelly going to be being delayed, from 5.2 to 5.3. So far: 1. We do have examples of production contracts where this change would have prevented issues/inconstency. 2....

@coderabbitai pause

Hello @SKYBITDev3 I don't see what is wrong with the current description. I look correct to me. IMO the proposed "corrected description" is less clear. @ernestognw ?

> So you should make it clear that `burnFrom` makes it possible for any account or contract to burn a holder's tokens if that holder gives an allowance beforehand, even...

Hello @nambrot I believe this is very circumstantial, in particular (as you pointed out) because the vault would need to be whitelisted/approved to avoid circumventing the vesting. I'm wondering if...

> traditional ERC20/721 have immutables The core ERC20 and ERC721 contract do NOT use immutable. Some extension do use them to store values that are not subject to change (for...

Hello @byeongsu-hong One of the reason these function are not exposed is because inproper arguments would cause unsafe/unexpected behavior, and checking the arguments are correct would require additional sloads that...