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

docs: remove any mentions of randomness lookback limits #2034

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 21, 2025

Conversation

Stebalien
Copy link
Member

They don't exist.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.63%. Comparing base (1e31330) to head (d291223).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2034   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   75.63%   75.63%           
=======================================
  Files         155      155           
  Lines       15676    15676           
=======================================
  Hits        11857    11857           
  Misses       3819     3819           

/// | [`IllegalArgument`] | invalid buffer, etc. |
/// | Error | Reason |
/// |---------------------|------------------------|
/// | [`IllegalArgument`] | epoch is in the future |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"epoch is not a valid prior epoch number"? e.g. negatives, too

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It'll just return randomness from epoch 0. Historically it hashed it with the epoch number (giving each epoch unique randomness), now we expect that to happen in the actors themselves.

I'll document that. Also, I'll document null tipset behavior (or try to... it changes network version to network version).

@rjan90
Copy link
Contributor

rjan90 commented Jan 7, 2025

Is there any outstanding work left here, or can we merge this?

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member Author

Ideally it would include more extensive documentation around different epochs, but we might as well merge it as-is as it's strictly an improvement.

@Stebalien Stebalien merged commit 525faea into master Jan 21, 2025
14 checks passed
@Stebalien Stebalien deleted the steb/fix-rand-docs branch January 21, 2025 00:00
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.

5 participants