WIP implementation of Danksharding #2792
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
minor Merge and forkchoice updates release
release v1.1.7
release v1.1.8
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
vbuterin
reviewed
Jan 7, 2022
Nashatyrev
reviewed
Jan 12, 2022
Member
Nashatyrev
left a comment
Nashatyrev
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some minor questions and cleanup suggestions
Nashatyrev
reviewed
Jan 12, 2022
Nashatyrev
reviewed
Jan 12, 2022
Nashatyrev
reviewed
Jan 13, 2022
Nashatyrev
reviewed
Jan 13, 2022
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hsiao-Wei Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: George Kadianakis <[email protected]>
Contributor
Author
|
Now ready for merge @djrtwo |
djrtwo
approved these changes
Jul 14, 2022
specs/sharding/beacon-chain.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ```python | ||
| def process_block(state: BeaconState, block: BeaconBlock) -> None: | ||
| def process_beacon_block(state: BeaconState, block: BeaconBlock) -> None: |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Renaming this is going to have large ripple effects in testing, tooling, and any rile with the function as dependency. Suggest keeping the same name and just adding the process_intermediate_block
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
process_intermediate_block
Did we settle on "builder block" (and "proposer block")?
Contributor
|
Does it make sense to rebase/squash the commits a bit? Or even do "Squash and merge"? |
Contributor
|
I'm fine with squash and merge |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
11 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
https://notes.ethereum.org/3t5cbN7cQnG6VxjgNMKymA