The main reasons to use another create2 deployer are (1) pass init data to be called after deploy, (2) more leading zeros for cheaper deploy, and I think that's it? Given that, an alternative is to mine a cheap address, agree on the deploy contract's code, deploy it to all the chains, and replace the current default. One downside here is this is a breaking change for anyone relying on the current deployer for vanity addresses.

@sambacha would that work as an alternative / are there other reasons people might need a custom deployer?

The factory contract I linked has additional benefits such as:

There is also a view function that computes the address of the contract that will be created when submitting a given salt or nonce along with a given block of initialization code.
Determine if a contract has already been deployed by the factory to a given address.
Modifier to ensure that the first 20 bytes of a submitted salt match those of the calling account. This provides protection against the salt being stolen by frontrunners or other attackers.

Yes for leading zeros, I am using this: https://github.com/0age/create2crunch

wdyt @mds1

feat: migrate to CreateX for CREATE2 factory #2638

Description

Describe the feature you would like

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

feat: migrate to `CreateX` for `CREATE2` factory #2638