Building an EVM-based dApp
Last updated
Last updated
deBridge is DeFi's internet of liquidity, enabling any amount of cross-chain interactions (bridging, value transfers, ext calls, etc) in a single transaction. Due to the ability to simultaneously send messages and value deBridge acts as a unified framework for all cross-chain needs and is capable of interconnecting any smart contract on any supported blockchain.
This guide is a great starting point that covers all necessary topics to get you started building cross-chain interactions on top of the deBridge protocol and its' infrastructure.
Let's consider the following idea of the conceptual dApp consisting of two smart contacts: a Counter
smart contract residing in one chain, where the integer property (counter
) is stored and can be incremented by a call initiated by and only by the Incrementor
contract from another chain. In other words, when we perform some action against the Incrementor
contract, it initiates a cross-chain transaction (a submission, in terms of the deBridge protocol) which is being started on one chain, relayed to, and then executed on another chain; during this cross-chain transaction, a Counter
contract is called. The following image presents a high-level overview of a cross-chain transaction we are going to achieve:
This document will guide you through building contracts, scripts and unit tests necessary to make this project happen. A self-contained source code of this dApp can be found on Github: debridge-finance/debridge-cross-chain-dapp-example.git
.
Though hypothetical, this example may be used as a foundation for real-life cases, e.g. you may want to track the supply of your token issued across multiple chains on one chain, or send price feeds and trigger events or even actions to buy or sell, etc.
Counter
contractLet's start with making the counter contract, responsible for keeping the integer property and accepting calls to increment it. Obviously, there should be a property and a method:
Looks simple! However, we need to put some security restrictions on this method: first, we must ensure it can be called by the deBridgeGate
smart contract only, and second, this call should occur only during the cross-chain transaction originating from the Incrementor
smart contract at the specific address on another chain. How can this be achieved?
The cross-chain transaction is a message from the origin chain with a payload that includes (among other info) the packed address of the initiator (nativeSender
) - i.e. an entity that actually initiated the transaction by calling the deBridgeGate
contract on the origin chain. When the cross-chain transaction is being relayed, the deBridgeGate
contract on the destination chain temporarily exposes the state of the transaction it currently handles via its properties and then calls a target smart contract (whose address is also a part of a payload) through its helper intermediary. It means that the contract on the target address may access this data.
To make this happen, the Counter
must know the deBridgeGate
contract's address on the current chain, so it is reasonable to inject it via a constructor:
Then, we can start putting restrictions on the receiveIncrementCommand
method using a modifier. The first obvious check we must perform is to ensure this method is called by the deBridgeGate
's helper intermediary - a CallProxy
contract responsible for performing actual calls (the deBridgeGate
contract doesn't make calls directly for security considerations):
It is implied by the protocol that such calls may occur only while deBridgeGate
handles some cross-chain transactions relayed from another chain.
The not-so-obvious second check is related to our business logic: we want to ensure that a transaction is originating from the chain we know and from the contract we trust. To make such validation happen, we must preliminarily store the trusted address in the Counter
contract, for example like this:
Note that we store the packed version of the caller's address (mind that trustedCrossChainCaller
is defined as bytes
rather than the address
): this happens because the deBridgeGate
smart contract stores the byte representation of the native sender address to ensure future compatibility with non-EVM chains (e.g. Solana).
Later, after you deploy the Incrementor
contract and get its address, we may let the Counter
contract know about it by calling the addChainSupport
method.
As soon as the Counter
contract starts storing the caller's address, the cross-chain transaction is allowed to originate from, we may reuse this data and add the additional validation logic to the modifier:
That's it! Now if we apply the given modifier to the target receiveIncrementCommand
method, it becomes properly protected from unauthorized calls and ready to receive commands from the trusted contract on another chain:
Incrementor
contractNow after we have the Counter
contract and know its interface, we may design the Incrementor
contract, which is responsible for initiating the cross-chain call to Counter
's receiveIncrementCommand()
. First things first, we must let the Incrementor
know where the Counter
contract actually resides, so we inject it with the chain ID and address of the Counter
contract, and we also specify the address of the deBridgeGate
contract as well:
For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that anyone may invoke the Incrementor
, so let its interface be as simple as follows:
Crafting the deBridge submission (a cross-chain transaction) spins around the deBridgeGate
's send()
method — the only entry point to initiate a transaction. It accepts plenty of non-trivial variables and structs. Let's overview all of them to make our submission happen.
Worth mentioning that the send()
method is marked as payable (meaning that it accepts ether during a call) and it is necessary to bypass enough ether to cover the protocol fee (or global fixed native fee, according to the internal definition) taken in the native currency of the chain. How much? The fee varies from chain to chain: for example, at the time of writing the fee on Ethereum is 0.001 ETH and the fee on Polygon is 0.5 MATIC. Since fees can be changed by deBridge governance and are expected to be reduced as protocol scales, you are advised to retrieve the actual fee amount by reading deBridgeGate
's globalFixedNativeFee
property either on-chain:
or by making a call to the RPC node:
Then pass the retrieved amount of ether to the call:
The gate accepts a variety of parameters through the SubmissionAutoParamsTo
struct (see its definition), so it is important to understand each.
executionFee
(or included gas) is the amount of the bridged asset that will be transferred to anyone who will deliver the message in the destination chain. In other words, this is a prepayment for potential gas expenses on the target chain, that will be transferred by the protocol to the address that claims the message. Anyone can run the keeper service to deliver messages and earn the executionFee
. This is an advanced topic that runs out of the scope of this document, so for the sake of simplicity just set this value to zero.
flags
is a bitmask of toggles affecting the behavior of the gate. The following flags are important to be set in our case:
REVERT_IF_EXTERNAL_FAIL
tells the CallProxy
to revert the whole claim transaction in case the call to the receiver address (the callee contract on the destination chain; it is the Counter
contract in our case) fails. Select the proper behavior wisely, ensuring it is aligned with the design of the callee contract: for example, the contract may fail deliberately and irretrievably so it may be reasonable to handle this call gracefully and mark the whole cross-chain transaction as succeeded. Keep in mind that once the claim transaction succeeds it submissionId
is marked as used, so you cannot replay the transaction on the destination chain.
PROXY_WITH_SENDER
tells the CallProxy
to expose the address that initiated the cross-chain transaction (submission) on the origin chain. Again, choose wisely: as for our case, the Counter
contract expects this data, so we need to ensure it's presented on the destination chain.
A complete list of flags with their description can be found on
EVM smart contract interfaces page
fallbackAddress
is the address on the destination chain where the bridged funds will be transferred to in case the call to the receiver address fails AND REVERT_IF_EXTERNAL_FAIL
is not set. Since we don't bridge any funds (only the calldata), this field is not very important though it is mandatory to set it. Mind that this address must be packed into bytes.
data
is the field for the calldata
to execute on the destination chain. Not a big deal if the contracts reside on different chains: we can encode the call using the interface of the contract to call. In our case, we can import the interface of the Counter
(ICrossChainCounter
) and use it with the encodeWithSelector
to produce valid instructions aligned with the interface of Counter
's receiveIncrementCommand
method:
Summing it up, here is the complete snippet that produces an autoParams
struct with settings that suit our needs:
Of course, you can craft the autoParams
struct either on-chain (as in the example above) or off-chain using ethers.js or web3.js.
send()
argsThe last major step towards successful submission is the understanding of args of the send()
method.
_tokenAddress
is the address of the ERC-20 token contract whose tokens you are willing to bridge additionally along with the calldata
. If you are willing to bridge the native currency (e.g. ETH from Ethereum), use the zero address (address(0)
).
_amount
is the amount of tokens (of the contract specified in the first arg) you are willing to bridge. Dealing with bridged assets is an advanced topic which out of the scope of this document, so in this example, it is enough to set this arg to zero. The following things are worth mentioning: first, the gate cuts a small 0.1% fee off the bridged asset; second, if you bridge the native currency of the origin blockchain, you must not forget to supply an additional amount to cover the protocol fee, but not include it in this arg value; third, the aforementioned executionFee
(included gas) is counted in the currency of this bridged asset, so its decimals must be in sync with this asset; fourth, ERC-20 tokens should not be transferred in/out explicitly, use allowance and safeTransferFrom
instead.
_chainIdTo
sets the destination chain ID. Consider looking at chainlist.org for known chain IDs, see the list of supported chains in our docs, or query deBridgeGate.getChainToConfig
on-chain property for programmatic access to the list of chains supported by deBridge.
_receiver
defines the address on the destination chain to receive bridged assets (if any) and be called by the CallProxy
contract in case the call data is given. In the given example, we must set this arg to the address of the Counter
smart contract.
_permit
allows the caller to specify EIP-2612-compliant signed approval for the deBridgeGate
contract to transfer the tokens specified in the first arg. Not applicable here.
_useAssetFee
allows paying the protocol fee in the currency of the asset being bridged rather than the native currency of the blockchain. Not applicable here.
_referralCode
is used to mark the submission with your own code, which will be used later.
_autoParams
is the encoded autoParams
struct we've crafted in the previous chapter.
If you integrate with or build applications on top of the deBridge infrastructure, make sure you specify your referral code that can be generated by pressing the WAGMI button at https://app.debridge.finance/. Governance may thank you later for being an early builder.
The list of args is enormously long due to the internal complexity and the wide range of features deBridge protocol provides, but, however, there are only three args you must care about right now: _chainIdTo
, _receiver
and _autoParams
. The snippet that actually makes a call to the deBridgeGate
contract may look like this:
Of course, this call may be crafted on-chain in your own contract or off-chain. After this call to deBridgeGate
is made within a blockchain, the cross-chain transaction is being initiated.
Consider reading the Lifecycle of a cross-chain call to get yourself familiar with how the cross-chain calls are handled.
After our smart contract (Incrementor
in our case) submits a new cross-chain call, the deBridgeGate
contract emits a Sent
event containing all necessary details about the cross-chain call, including the submissionId
— the global cross-chain identifier of such a call. The submissionId
is the important thing to identify our submission, so we must capture it either by parsing the event manually or using deBridge SDK (deSDK) which does this action for us:
The submission gets accepted by the validators after a transaction (containing the cross-chain call has been submitted) receives 12 block confirmations (256 for the Polygon chain). This is a required transaction finality validators are waiting for to avoid the consequences of the network divergence. You can monitor the finality of the transaction in a few ways: either using the preferred library (web3.js, ethers.js, or whatever) or with a little help of deSDK:
The number of block confirmations required for sent messages can be found in Fees and Supported Chains section
After the origin transaction receives enough block confirmations, we may start pulling the signatures. Currently, signatures are available through the deBridge API: you can query them manually by calling the API directly, or use deSDK which additionally checks if enough signatures have been published already:
After the submission has been confirmed and signed by enough validators, it's time to craft a claiming transaction that will land down the submission and execute the message on the destination chain.
To claim a submission, a call to the deBridgeGate.claim()
method on the destination chain must be crafted using the data from taken from various sources, which isn't an easy task, so there is deSDK which takes the burden of data preparation:
Then you can pass the args to the deBridgeGate.claim()
method, and finally sign and broadcast your transaction and wait for the Claimed
event. This will indicate a successful submission completion.
Keep in mind that estimating gas for such transaction may have undesirable pitfalls that we have covered in our small research - this may be the case if you turn off the REVERT_IF_EXTERNAL_FAIL
flag. We recommend using professional transaction simulation services (offered by Tenderly or Blocknative) rather than calling your RPC's eth_estimateGas
endpoint.
Consider using the debridge-hardhat
plugin for Hardhat to test your contracts on the emulated environment
Find the source code of the example project examined in this document, along with tests and helper commands.
Start using deSDK to send, track and claim submissions programmatically
Watch the walkthrough video on how to use deBridge emulator for your development environment:
debridge protocol: advanced topics:
deBridge protocol flags explained (coming soon)
Transaction bundling explained (coming soon)
Execution fee explained (coming soon)
Bridging arbitrary assets explained (coming soon)