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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Decide how capabilities should be replaced/deleted #132

Open
JakeOShannessy opened this issue Apr 8, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

Decide how capabilities should be replaced/deleted #132

JakeOShannessy opened this issue Apr 8, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
T-evm Target system: Ethereum EVM

Comments

@JakeOShannessy
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is based on a comment in #129.

When registering a procedure which previously existed there is a potential for the newly registered procedure to inherit the capabilities of the previously deleted procedure. Currently the alpha PR just sets the clists to zero length before registering a new procedure. However, we might want to consider this when deleting procedures. When deleting a procedure we have three options for how we treat the old procedures:

  1. Do nothing. Let registration handle it.
  2. Set all the c-list lengths to zero.
  3. Clear everything.
@JakeOShannessy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Clarification: by "do nothing" I mean currently option 1 is there in the code by default.

@Latrasis
Copy link
Member

Let's do 3. However not in #129, but as a seperate PR.

@Latrasis Latrasis added the T-evm Target system: Ethereum EVM label May 6, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
T-evm Target system: Ethereum EVM
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@JakeOShannessy @Latrasis