Hey everyone,
I’m currently working on a task where I aim to interact with a contract without using the user’s wallet directly. Instead, I’m attempting to use a provider for this purpose. Here’s the approach I’ve taken:
Wallet.fromAddress(
"0xdd8ce029ad3f4f78c0891513dcfa72914d9c7b8fe44faf2e1a9a9b33b5ee5b94",
provider,
);
It looks a little odd to me. The reason behind this is the necessity to have funds in the balance for the simulate()
function to work. I’m wondering if there might be a better way to achieve this or if I’m possibly overlooking something.
Is there an alternative approach or a best practice for such a scenario?
Thank you!