You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 13, 2022. It is now read-only.
When we are going to apply some persistent modifier (block) to the Node in NodeViewHolder we are processing modifier step by step:
Append it to History and collect some changes (ProgressInfo)
In case of success, apply changes to State
After each successful applying notify History via reportModifierIsValid method.
From a History point of view History.reportModifierIsValid execution means that we applied a new Tip to our chain. For example, in HybridApp HybridHistrory.reportModifierIsValid updating of best block (tip) is done.
From other side, if we have some Fork, then before applying fork blocks to the State, we should do a rollback to some branch point first. But in this case no notification of History provided.
So, at least for me, "reportModifierIsValid" naming is misleading. Also absence of notification after State rollback seems strange.
Can you explain current logic?
Thanks a lot!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
When we are going to apply some persistent modifier (block) to the Node in NodeViewHolder we are processing modifier step by step:
From a History point of view History.reportModifierIsValid execution means that we applied a new Tip to our chain. For example, in HybridApp HybridHistrory.reportModifierIsValid updating of best block (tip) is done.
From other side, if we have some Fork, then before applying fork blocks to the State, we should do a rollback to some branch point first. But in this case no notification of History provided.
So, at least for me, "reportModifierIsValid" naming is misleading. Also absence of notification after State rollback seems strange.
Can you explain current logic?
Thanks a lot!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: