More detail about new AVM contract to contract

[fabrice]

@hungpq

applications can create other contracts on the network this sound like factory pattern can be used here. any code example of app create app here since seem like this still a new things and haven’t been updated in the examples?

That is a good point.

A minor caveat is that right now in many cases where Ethereum use a factory design, I personally believe it is cleaner on Algorand to use local storage of fresh accounts rekeyed to the application account address (or controlled by a LogicSig).
This is what tinyman is using for example: GitHub - tinymanorg/tinyman-contracts-v1: Tinyman AMM Contracts V1.1

@hungpq

• i see in the article that contract C can using CallerApplicationID and CalllerApplicationAddress in group txn2 to get the info of contract B. but any others way to do this? something like txn.sender in others platform?

I don’t think there is another way. Why do you want another way?

@hungpq

• in the contract C with group txn2 what is the value for Txn.sender() and Gtxn[index]? does it refer to group txn1 or group inner txn 2?

Apart from CallerApplicationID and CallerApplicationAddress, everything looks like the transaction was made at top-level from Contract C point of view. Txn and Gtxn refer to the inner transaction and inner transaction group that called Contract C (that is in your notation group txn2).

@hungpq

• contract C if need to check group txn 2 field can using Gtxn[index]? or need to call others Pyteal opcode since i cant find it in the new version of pyteal (v10)? if does have pyteal corresponding to op code gitxn (to reveal inner group txn2) please let me know.

It can use gtxn.
gitxn is to inspect inner transactions made by contract C.