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

document: changes to fee calculation w.r. ref scripts #408

Closed
ashisherc opened this issue May 1, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #685
Closed

document: changes to fee calculation w.r. ref scripts #408

ashisherc opened this issue May 1, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #685
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation era: conway

Comments

@ashisherc
Copy link

Please document if any changes coming to Conway era regarding fee calculation w.r.t ref scripts

@WhatisRT
Copy link
Collaborator

WhatisRT commented May 2, 2024

We have this line in the Conway spec: https://github.com/IntersectMBO/formal-ledger-specifications/blob/master/src/Ledger/Utxo.lagda#L132

I admit the notation is a bit confusing (this is for technical reasons - it used to have clearer notation). I don't know if we can reasonably improve that notation. Does that answer this issue?

@ashisherc
Copy link
Author

The notation is good enough for me, but I am looking for a simpler explanation as well, also mentioning such a change that is coming with Conway. In the previous era specs, every change/new update being introduced are documented nicely.

@WhatisRT
Copy link
Collaborator

WhatisRT commented May 6, 2024

There should be a paragraph documenting this as part of the final spec.

@WhatisRT WhatisRT added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation era: conway labels May 6, 2024
@carlostome carlostome linked a pull request Feb 12, 2025 that will close this issue
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation era: conway
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants