GH-3 Identify transaction types and define them in txs.hrl #30
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that this indenting looks much better, specially if record names are long
record(oracle_new_tx, {
id = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
account = <<>> :: pubkey(),
question = <<>> :: binary(),
difficulty = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
start_date = 0 :: integer(),
fee = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
nonce = 0 :: non_neg_integer()
}).
compared to the original
record(oracle_new_tx, {id = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
account = <<>> :: pubkey(),
question = <<>> :: binary(),
difficulty = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
start_date = 0 :: integer(),
fee = 0 :: non_neg_integer(),
nonce = 0 :: non_neg_integer()}).
@sennui What do you think?
|
@wagerlabs I recognise the orignal as emacs-otp indenting. If we can put rules around the first, I dont mind it (I would like just to make it more specific) |
apps/aecore/include/txs.hrl
Outdated
| fee = 0 :: non_neg_integer(), | ||
| nonce = 0 :: non_neg_integer()}). | ||
|
|
||
| -record(channel_slash_tx, {id = 0 :: non_neg_integer(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we improve naming? slash is not saying anything? is anyone using it and this is why we use slash? Maybe: Overload?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The indent I prefer is how my Emacs is indenting if you leave the opening brace hanging.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Slash is a cryptocurrency term so I would leave it. We'll evaluate the transaction itself when we get to channels.
apps/aecore/include/txs.hrl
Outdated
| fee = 0 :: non_neg_integer(), | ||
| nonce = 0 :: non_neg_integer()}). | ||
|
|
||
| -record(channel_solo_close_tx, {id = 0 :: non_neg_integer(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't comment on the naming because some of the transactions may go eventually. I do think that having both close and solo close is superfluous as the system should be able to recognize that you are closing the channel unilaterally. Besides, it makes for less conflicts to resolve, e.g. when one side did a close and the other one a solo close.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well.. do we want to evaluate these transactions now, or leave it as it is, and massage when channels implementation takes place?
|
@wagerlabs Yes, agree with indentation comment. @sennui What is proposed is still emacs indenting. |
|
@sennui @wagerlabs can we merge? |
@sennui @wagerlabs This is the initial list of transactions (probably incomplete, but this may evolve once we implement). Thoughts?