Skip to content
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

feat: check submodule kakarot dirty #548

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 11, 2023

Conversation

greged93
Copy link
Contributor

Appends "-dirty" to the commit hash of Kakarot if the workdir contains local changes.

Time spent on this PR: 0.1 day

Resolves: #NA

Pull Request type

Please check the type of change your PR introduces:

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update (formatting, renaming)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no API changes)
  • Build-related changes
  • Documentation content changes
  • Testing

What is the new behavior?

Adds "-dirty" for a dirty submodule.

Does this introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

@ClementWalter ClementWalter added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 11, 2023
Merged via the queue into kkrt-labs:main with commit 303fa33 Sep 11, 2023
7 checks passed
anukkrit149 pushed a commit to karnotxyz/kakarot-rpc that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2024
<!--- Please provide a general summary of your changes in the title
above -->

<!-- Give an estimate of the time you spent on this PR in terms of work
days. Did you spend 0.5 days on this PR or rather 2 days? -->

Time spent on this PR: .1

## Pull request type

<!-- Please try to limit your pull request to one type, submit multiple
pull requests if needed. -->

Please check the type of change your PR introduces:

- [X] Bugfix
- [ ] Feature
- [ ] Code style update (formatting, renaming)
- [ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
- [ ] Build related changes
- [ ] Documentation content changes
- [ ] Other (please describe):

## What is the current behavior?

Gasprice was returning a nonconstant value that was dependent on
execution.

Resolves #<Issue number>

## What is the new behavior?

Gasprice returns the amount of ether that the sender is willing to pay
per unit of gas to execute the transaction.


## Other information

I believe gasPrice is relayed from the rpc to the execution system, but
currently only `gas_limit` is parameterized at the entry point of
`execute_at_address`, so pragmaticly this opcode is always returning
zero.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants