-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Timestamp Inherent #100
Timestamp Inherent #100
Conversation
…ts into the block. Let's dig deeper.
…ore we merge this PR.
Now nodes can import one block before the authoring node unpeers with them.
… because of this inherent stuff.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
…trate's network module
This has nothing to do with the `StateVersion` enum.
They don't fully make sense yet because I haven't expanded the storage to differentiate best time from any other noted time. That will be next.
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.
New changes with single-output design are generally good, let's wait for the tests to see if I missed anything
/// as check the verifier information in some unique way. | ||
/// This full ConstraintChecker should only be implemented if the piece logic cannot be expressed with | ||
/// the SimpleConstraintChecker. For example, if you need to enforce the verifier is a particular type | ||
/// or contains a certain value. Another reason would be if you need to implement an inherent. |
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.
I was thinking maybe we could add an InherentConstraintChecker
trait instead.
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.
Yeah. This is a good idea. It would simplify a lot of things. This is roughly what I had in mind when I put (Deferred to followup) Rework relationship between constraint checkers and inherent hooks.
as one of the checklist items in the PR description.
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 was a big one but nice job figuring out how to do this!
Signed-off-by: muraca <mmuraca247@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: muraca <mmuraca247@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: muraca <mmuraca247@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: muraca <mmuraca247@gmail.com>
Closes #90
This main purpose of this PR is to blaze a path for how inherents can be used in Tuxedo.
As a concrete starting point we introduce the timestamp inherent which is ubiquitous in FRAME runtimes.
SetTimestamp
forbidden in pool (so it must be inherent)Deferred until Accumulators for intra-block book-keeping #105 lands) Ensure exactly one time stamp per block.GenesisBlockBuilder
#107 is implemented) Remove the special case for initializing timestamp in the first block.