-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 217
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
do not enforce non-empty outputs for unsigned tx #2255
Conversation
@@ -970,7 +970,7 @@ data UnsignedTx input = UnsignedTx | |||
{ unsignedInputs | |||
:: NonEmpty input | |||
, unsignedOutputs | |||
:: NonEmpty TxOut | |||
:: [TxOut] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should add a comment here why we don't want NonEmpty. Will bite someone later, maybe.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, there are many use-cases for empty outputs. This occurs in particular often when performing a selection for delegation: in this scenario, there are typically no outputs at all and, depending on the size of the selected input(s), there might be no change at all (because of the minUTxO value).
c60c5a6
to
2bdbb29
Compare
bors merge |
2255: do not enforce non-empty outputs for unsigned tx r=KtorZ a=KtorZ # Issue Number <!-- Put here a reference to the issue this PR relates to and which requirements it tackles --> #2200 # Overview <!-- Detail in a few bullet points the work accomplished in this PR --> - c60c5a6 📍 **do not enforce non-empty outputs for unsigned tx** Actually, there are many use-cases for empty outputs. This occurs in particular often when performing a selection for delegation: in this scenario, there are typically no outputs at all and, depending on the size of the selected input(s), there might be no change at all (because of the minUTxO value). # Comments <!-- Additional comments or screenshots to attach if any --> Should fix: - #2213 (comment) - #2213 (comment) Thanks @piotr-iohk 🙏 <!-- Don't forget to: ✓ Self-review your changes to make sure nothing unexpected slipped through ✓ Assign yourself to the PR ✓ Assign one or several reviewer(s) ✓ Once created, link this PR to its corresponding ticket ✓ Assign the PR to a corresponding milestone ✓ Acknowledge any changes required to the Wiki --> Co-authored-by: KtorZ <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🎉
Build failed:
Same as: #2249 (comment) |
What the heck o.O |
bors merge |
Build succeeded: |
2268: Remove outdated comments about empty output lists in transactions. r=KtorZ a=jonathanknowles # Issue Number Cleanup after #2247, #2255, and other related PRs. # Overview This PR: * removes a couple of outdated comments about disallowing empty lists of outputs in transactions. It's been established that having an empty list of outputs is perfectly reasonable in certain circumstances (such as a transaction that includes just a delegation certificate). * updates the `Arbitrary ApiTransaction` instance to generate possibly-empty lists of outputs. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Knowles <[email protected]>
2268: Remove outdated comments about empty output lists in transactions. r=KtorZ a=jonathanknowles # Issue Number Cleanup after #2247, #2255, and other related PRs. # Overview This PR: * removes a couple of outdated comments about disallowing empty lists of outputs in transactions. It's been established that having an empty list of outputs is perfectly reasonable in certain circumstances (such as a transaction that includes just a delegation certificate). * updates the `Arbitrary ApiTransaction` instance to generate possibly-empty lists of outputs. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Knowles <[email protected]>
2268: Remove outdated comments about empty output lists in transactions. r=jonathanknowles a=jonathanknowles # Issue Number Cleanup after #2247, #2255, and other related PRs. # Overview This PR: * removes a couple of outdated comments about disallowing empty lists of outputs in transactions. It's been established that having an empty list of outputs is perfectly reasonable in certain circumstances (such as a transaction that includes just a delegation certificate). * updates the `Arbitrary ApiTransaction` instance to generate possibly-empty lists of outputs. Co-authored-by: Jonathan Knowles <[email protected]>
Issue Number
#2200
Overview
📍 do not enforce non-empty outputs for unsigned tx
Actually, there are many use-cases for empty outputs. This occurs in
particular often when performing a selection for delegation: in this
scenario, there are typically no outputs at all and, depending on the
size of the selected input(s), there might be no change at all
(because of the minUTxO value).
Comments
Should fix:
Thanks @piotr-iohk 🙏