Added EOF prefix to 4530 and 4200, for ease of searching for EOF-related EIPs.

[bobsummerwill]

Minor formatting tweak:
Added EOF prefix to 4530 and 4200, for ease of searching for EOF-related EIPs.

[eth-bot]

Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s):

---

(fail) eip-3540.md

classification
updateEIP

• eip-3540.md requires approval from one of (@axic, @chfast, @gumb0)

(fail) eip-4200.md

classification
updateEIP

• eip-4200.md requires approval from one of (@axic, @gumb0, @chfast)

[xinbenlv]

This seems duplicating.

Is this what you intend?

Suggested change

	title: EOF - EVM Object Format (EOF) v1
	title: EOF - EVM Object Format v1

[bobsummerwill]

It is slightly redundant in this case, but the goal is to have consistent prefixing for ease of searching.

In this case ...

EOF: EVM Object Format (EOF) v1

Is fine, imho, as the two EOFs in that title serve different purposes.

Anyway - better as a new PR from @chfast, I think, to redo them all.

[xinbenlv]

Thanks for cleaning and formatting. Please fix linters and this PR shall be good to go

[lightclient]

@xinbenlv we will be waiting until the authors approve this change.

[xinbenlv]

@lightclient oh yes, you are right. Thanks for reminder!

[chfast]

Please also rebase. I believe we fixed all EIP bot issues.

[chfast]

Suggested change

	title: EOF - EVM Object Format (EOF) v1
	title: EOF: EVM Object Format v1

Let's use "EOF:" prefix.

[gumb0]

EIP Walidator disagrees

Error: error[preamble-re-title-colon]: preamble header `title` should not contain `:`
 --> EIPS/eip-3540.md:3:7
  |
3 | title: "EOF: EVM Object Format v1"
  |       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ prohibited pattern was matched
  |
  = info: the pattern in question: `:`

#6007

[chfast]

Let's keep - then

[chfast]

Suggested change

	title: EOF - Static relative jumps
	title: EOF: Static relative jumps

[bobsummerwill]

@chfast Going with a consistent EOF: prefix makes sense to me, but will bring more files into this.

Given that the author needs to approve edits, and you are author for them all, and rebasing is needed, maybe easier to ditch this pull request and you submit a new one yourself with them consistently formatted as you wish?

I just created the PR to try to resolve the inconsistency which made it hard to search for all EOF related EIPs.

[gumb0]

EIPs were renamed, this can ba closed now.

[bobsummerwill]

Thanks guys!