Fix formatting and bug in pseudocode in patricia-merkle-trie#14486
Conversation
Prior to the change the doc wasn't formatted for Python code, even though mostly Python syntax is used,
which might've lead to decrease in comprehension as the syntax wasn't highlighted.
All the code was formatted with the Black formatter to ease comprehension.
Additionally, the following line contained bug:
```python
if node = '': return ''
```
The comparison operator (==) was likely meant.
Privat33r-dev
requested review from
corwintines,
minimalsm,
pettinarip and
wackerow
as code owners
✅ Deploy Preview for ethereumorg ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
️✅ There are no secrets present in this pull request anymore.If these secrets were true positive and are still valid, we highly recommend you to revoke them. 🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request. |
|
@Aldekein I guess that it is a false positive. It's not even a part of the PR. |
|
This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. |
github-actions
Bot
added
the
Status: Stale
wackerow
left a comment
wackerow
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @Privat33r-dev! Sorry for delay, pulling in
|
Congrats, your important contribution to this open-source project has earned you a GitPOAP! GitPOAP: 2025 Ethereum.org Contributor: Head to gitpoap.io & connect your GitHub account to mint!Keep buidling, keep learning, and let's grow the Ethereum open-source community together 🌱 Learn more about GitPOAPs here. |
|
Thanks for the merge! I am just glad that it was merged while still being relevant. |
2 participants
Prior to the change the doc wasn't formatted for Python code, even though mostly Python syntax is used, which might've lead to decrease in comprehension as the syntax wasn't highlighted.
All the code was formatted with the Black formatter to ease comprehension.
Additionally, the following line contained bug:
The comparison operator (==) was likely meant.
Description
Related Issue