ERC-7540 vs ERC-8161
Asynchronous ERC-4626 Tokenized Vaults compared with Transferable Tokenized Vault Requests.
No shared functions
0 shared · 8 vs 2 functions · 0% of the smaller surface
ERC-8161 lists ERC-7540 in its requires field but declares no inheritance in its interface, so any surface it inherits is not counted here.
🤝 Shared (0)
None.
◀️ Only in ERC-7540 (8)
0x995ea21a | claimableDepositRequest(uint256,address) |
0xeaed1d07 | claimableRedeemRequest(uint256,address) |
0xb6363cf2 | isOperator(address,address) |
0x26c6f96c | pendingDepositRequest(uint256,address) |
0xf5a23d8d | pendingRedeemRequest(uint256,address) |
0x85b77f45 | requestDeposit(uint256,address,address) |
0x7d41c86e | requestRedeem(uint256,address,address) |
0x558a7297 | setOperator(address,bool) |
▶️ Only in ERC-8161 (2)
0x53b3bb0a | transferDepositRequest(uint256,address,address) |
0x7846f5bd | transferRedeemRequest(uint256,address,address) |
Both surfaces parsed from the canonical specifications: ERC-7540 · ERC-8161