Fixed typos in abi-spec documentation #3386
Conversation
|
@nisdas I took the liberty to explain the components of X a little better. Also, I think that |
|
@axic, please review |
docs/abi-spec.rst
Outdated
| @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ We distinguish static and dynamic types. Static types are encoded in-place and d | |||
| * ``bytes`` | |||
| * ``string`` | |||
| * ``T[]`` for any ``T`` | |||
| * ``T[k]`` for any dynamic ``T`` and any ``k > 0`` | |||
| * ``T[k]`` for any dynamic ``T`` and any ``k >= 0`` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is T[0] valid in the first place?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not? It reduces the amount of exceptional cases.
|
@axic to merge or not to merge? I'm fine with disallowing |
I don't mind. |
|
Will rebase. |
chriseth
force-pushed
the
abi-spec-documentation
branch
from
d44cb57
to
29572bd
Compare
|
So we went for allowing a useless construct of empty arrays? :) |
|
Probably it made sense merging this as is because it matches the code, but I think it should be discussed for both tuples and fixed-length arrays. Created an issue for that to receive more input. |
|
Actually I realized that we need empty statically-sized arrays: Otherwise, it is undefined how to encode a dynamic array of length zero. |
No description provided.