-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Light client contract related changes #3655
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
18 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
1c1ce75
Add struct StakeTableState.
philippecamacho 998dd79
Cargo.lock
philippecamacho a24cb7d
Revert "Cargo.lock"
philippecamacho a4f1ccf
remove fields from the GenericLightClientState
alysiahuggins fab4852
remove no longer used fields from the generalPublicInput that have be…
alysiahuggins d54f44b
remove threshold from generalPublicInput as it is no longer part of t…
alysiahuggins 764b95b
correct indices
alysiahuggins c4597b1
sync with 0.5.73
alxiong da227a0
fix clippy warning
alxiong 6f80d9e
merge back threshold and st comms into LightClientState
alxiong 0af7b25
add lightclientstate -> publicinput conversion
alxiong 16f8f2a
rename to StakeTableState
alysiahuggins 688e089
keep minimum LightClientState as discussed
alxiong 59c575d
Merge branch 'lc-contract-updates' of https://github.com/EspressoSyst…
alysiahuggins 825a72d
Merge branch 'main' into lc-contract-updates
alysiahuggins 40fe590
Merge branch 'main' into lc-contract-updates
philippecamacho 5d0176b
Use Cargo.lock from main
philippecamacho e56253e
Fix clippy warnings.
philippecamacho File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All of these magic numbers are kind of tricky to reason about, can we just use a named struct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@alxiong @alysiahuggins do you remember if there is any particular reason why we don't use a named struct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this is the decision made by @mrain and i recall the public input right now is simple enough to keep track of?
i also personally prefer a named struct, less error prone.
but i tried to make minimal changes for this task, so kept the legacy way. Can update in the future as tech debt.