Skip to content

feat(sdk-core): add abstract (chain 2741) v3 support - #696

Open
gomesalexandre wants to merge 1 commit into
Uniswap:mainfrom
gomesalexandre:feat_abstract_chain_sdk_core
Open

feat(sdk-core): add abstract (chain 2741) v3 support#696
gomesalexandre wants to merge 1 commit into
Uniswap:mainfrom
gomesalexandre:feat_abstract_chain_sdk_core

Conversation

@gomesalexandre

Copy link
Copy Markdown

closes #377

what

adds Abstract (ZK-stack L2, chainId 2741) to sdk-core with its Uniswap V3 deployment. Abstract has V3 live per the gov RFC "Deploy Uniswap v3 on Abstract", but it's absent from sdk-core, so any SDK consumer can't resolve its contract addresses.

how

  • chains.ts: ChainId.ABSTRACT = 2741, average block time (0.4), SUPPORTED_CHAINS
  • addresses.ts: ABSTRACT_ADDRESSES (V3 only) + CHAIN_TO_ADDRESSES_MAP entry (the derived V3 maps pick it up automatically)
  • tests in chains.test.ts + addresses.test.ts

the careful part: every address verified on-chain before inclusion

The issue proposed addresses marked "(to be verified)", and its V2 factory/router were Ethereum-mainnet placeholders (0x5C69…aA6f / 0x7a25…488D). Shipping wrong addresses in an SDK is how funds get lost, so I checked all of them against chain 2741 (https://api.mainnet.abs.xyz):

contract address check
v3CoreFactory 0xA1160e73B63F322ae88cC2d8E700833e71D0b2a1 deployed; feeAmountTickSpacing(500) = 10 ✅
swapRouter02 0x2cB10Ac97F2C3dAEDEaB7b72DbaEb681891f51B8 deployed; factory() → the v3CoreFactory ✅
nftPositionManager 0xfA928D3ABc512383b8E5E77edd2d5678696084F9 deployed; name() = "Uniswap V3 Positions NFT-V1", factory() → v3CoreFactory ✅
quoter 0x117Fc8DEf58147016f92bAE713533dDB828aBB7e deployed; factory() → v3CoreFactory ✅
multicall 0x9CA4dcb2505fbf536F6c54AA0a77C79f4fBC35C0 deployed ✅
tickLens 0x9c7d30F93812f143b6Efa673DB8448EfCB9f747E deployed ✅

V2 is omitted on purpose: the proposed V2 addresses have no bytecode on Abstract, and V2 was never in the RFC. 11 supported chains already ship no V2 factory (including ZKSYNC, the same ZK-stack family), so omitting is standard, not a gap.

Block time measured ~0.43s/block over 3000 blocks → 0.4.

receipts

$ cast chain-id --rpc-url https://api.mainnet.abs.xyz            → 2741
$ cast call <v3Factory>   "feeAmountTickSpacing(uint24)(int24)" 500   → 10
$ cast call <swapRouter02> "factory()(address)"                  → 0xA1160e73B63F322ae88cC2d8E700833e71D0b2a1
$ cast call <posManager>   "name()(string)"                      → "Uniswap V3 Positions NFT-V1"
$ cast call <posManager>   "factory()(address)"                  → 0xA1160e73B63F322ae88cC2d8E700833e71D0b2a1
$ cast code  <V2 factory placeholder>                            → 0x   (no code → omitted)

$ bun test    → 376 pass, 0 fail
$ bun run build → exit 0
$ eslint      → 0 warnings

Abstract (ZK-stack L2, chainId 2741) has Uniswap V3 deployed per the gov RFC
"Deploy Uniswap v3 on Abstract". Adds it to sdk-core: ChainId enum, average
block time, SUPPORTED_CHAINS, and a CHAIN_TO_ADDRESSES_MAP entry.

All addresses verified on-chain (chain 2741) before inclusion:
- every V3 address has bytecode and cross-references correctly (swapRouter02
  factory() and posManager factory() both point at the v3CoreFactory; factory
  feeAmountTickSpacing(500)=10; posManager name()="Uniswap V3 Positions NFT-V1")
- the issue's proposed V2 factory/router were Ethereum-mainnet placeholders with
  NO code on Abstract, so V2 is omitted (like ZKSYNC and 10 other supported
  chains that ship no V2 factory) rather than shipping wrong addresses
- block time measured ~0.4s/block over 3000 blocks

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@gomesalexandre
gomesalexandre requested a review from a team as a code owner August 16, 2026 16:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Adding support for Abstract Layer 2 in sdk-core

1 participant