EIPIP Meeting #120

Transcript

Heat. [Music] Super.

Jesus. Heat

up here. Heat. Heat.

I'm more or less fine because uh she has been consistently reviewing the PRs. Uh but I mean I'm not sure whether she is she's there yet now. Uh she's right now there yet where she can basically take calls on whether this stuff is mergible or not. uh but as an ERC I think uh it might be a good start for her and then uh as she is doing some core development for example with Ze and sometime she might be ready enough uh to be an EIP editor as well.

>> Okay. Yes. So I guess um just leave a comment on the uh call for input and uh >> yeah I have put this comment or oh not on call by input call for input maybe I'll drop it there as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. I guess um just I I guess clearly say yes or no for adding her. That'll make my job easier. Um >> all right. >> Yeah. Um and that's it for um the agenda. Um I guess we have EIP insight we can talk about. Um so I guess if we want to start the stream for talking about EIP insight uh we can do that. Otherwise um we don't have to.

It's up to you Sam. We can we can talk a bit about uh about that you know the PR which builds a lot of code and test. >> Oh sure. Yeah. Yeah, I guess. Yeah, definitely start the stream then. Uh, Akash. Oh, okay. Perfect. So basically uh I think uh the way we should uh handle uh test vectors and uh code in EIP is basically have a reference link uh to some uh section in discussions to and uh then discussions to can basically some people can put uh their code reference link and test

vectors reference link uh in discussions to only I think uh it would basically make the EIP lighter uh I mean the repo light as well as uh you know sort of abstract out uh uh you know I mean lot of code and lot of files that we don't have to review as an EIP editor because uh if there are a lot of files that are bundled in I mean uh as an EIP editor it sort of becomes necessary to go through each of them to see I mean not not just them on bas This is of technicality but at least to see that uh I mean it's not junk and there is nothing malicious over there.

>> Okay. Yeah. I mean so I think we have to balance that with the fact that a reference implementation is often the least ambiguous way to specify something. Um, like if you're specifying, let's say, a hash function, which this one is, like the best way to do it is just to write a function that computes the hash. Um, but I I do see where you're coming from. Like like if somebody wrote a reference implementation in like I don't know, brain or whatever, like I wouldn't want to have to review that. Um, I wouldn't be able to. So >> I mean we can have a pseudo code I mean

like we generally have in the EIP in the markdown file itself. I mean in terms of pseudo course code which is crisp succent I think that still makes sense for sure. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So I guess the the decision to make here is like do we remove reference implementations from the EIP document itself. >> I mean that is something that we can definitely look uh as as a backst step but right now with regard to the PR that we are dealing with so we can ask the person to sort of abstract out the code and uh you know uh add a link in discussions to for that code and mention

that discussions to link uh the section link uh in the EIP itself for the reference implementation. I think uh this is the concrete uh uh proposal or concrete uh decision that we can make right now. >> So you want to put a link to the discussions thread not just in the header but in the in the body as well. >> I mean yes I because I think discussions too is a place where if someone wants to uh link their reference implementation they can definitely uh link it over there. I I don't see there are any uh qums or any restrictions about uh referencing any

code from over there or any GitHub libraries from over there. My my hesitation there would be like um once uh an EIP goes final, it's not supposed to be editable anymore, but the discussions to thread um people can keep writing whatever they want on it forever. So it it kind of breaks that um guarantee that we have but it's not really worse than what we have now. So I don't feel that strongly about it, >> right? Uh so I guess for the current EIP uh we can basically mention this and uh at least when it's in the draft status

and then we can figure out when the person when the person's EIP goes into final we can have another round of discussion on it. >> Yep. I'm okay with that. >> All right. Cool. Thanks. Cool. Um, so observations from incoming PRs over the past month, I don't really have any. and then availability for hosting EIP editing office hours. Um, I'll do that offline. Um, I'll uh leave a note to myself for that.

Okay. Um so let's talk about EIP insights. Here we go. share my screen.

I'm definitely not uh the qualified person to be talking about this, but uh I can give it a go. So, uh how does Puja normally do this? We have five new reports or new EIPs in draft, four ERC's, one in review or four in review. Uh one moving into last call, two moving into final um and two moving into stagnant. We uh Ginder has eclipsed me in reviews this month. So uh awesome. Um let's see how we doing here. Um so we've moved 12 EIPDs into draft and one into final.

So, we're kind of losing the battle there. that's weird. Why is this 2024 just sitting on the end? That's an interesting bug. All right. that's a nice feature. Cool. Um, so that that's about all I'm comfortable talking

about for EIP insights. So, uh, yeah, that's pretty much it. Is there anything else we want to talk about before ending today's call? Great. Well, that sounds like the end of it. Thanks for coming out. We'll see you all at the next call and uh I'll poke you for uh office hour availability on Discord. Take care, everybody. What's up?