Why this conversation
How to argue a standards choice: name what each one is actually for, then find the layer where you don't have to choose.
Dialogue
Marek: Go with 4337. Alchemy runs the bundler and the paymaster, and it works on Sepolia today.
Jay: It does, and the user gets a new address, a smart account, that isn't the one they arrived with. 7702 lets the same EOA borrow contract code, so their address stays.
Marek: But there's no 7702 bundler infrastructure on our devnet.
Jay: There's no 4337 bundler there either. Anvil is just a node. Either way the devnet needs us to run something.
Marek: So it's not really a devnet argument.
Jay: No. The real question is what the user keeps. I'd design the intent layer so the account type is an adapter: 7702 where the chain supports it, 4337 where a bundler exists, same preview, same receipt.
Marek: That's more work up front.
Jay: A week more, and we stop having this argument every fork. Let's write the capability matrix first and pick per chain from it.
Key expressions
| Expression | 뜻 · 쓰이는 자리 |
|---|---|
| go with 4337 | 4337로 가자 |
| the one they arrived with | 그들이 가지고 온 것 |
| borrow contract code | 컨트랙트 코드를 빌리다 |
| there's no … there either | 거기엔 …도 없다 |
| either way | 어느 쪽이든 |
| not really a … argument | 사실 … 논쟁이 아니다 |
| what the user keeps | 사용자가 유지하는 것 |
| same preview, same receipt | 같은 미리보기, 같은 영수증 |
| more work up front | 초반 작업이 더 많다 |
| pick per chain from it | 거기서 체인별로 고르다 |