Clarify ACP-103 variable initialization #136
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
1 task
dhrubabasu
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2024
abi87
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2024
avalanche-foundation-admin
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently the specification is unclear as to what the initial value of
xandrare during the fork activation.I feel like the only "no numbers up my sleeve" choices for these are:
x=0r=0r=LHaving
rinitially set toLwould be the aggressive choice (as it's possible to have the previous block be full, and then 1 second later haveLcomplexity issued). The conservative choice (which is what I'm proposing in this PR) is to set the value to0. This choice really doesn't impact the mechanism for a long period of time. Just during the network upgrade transition.We could consider initializing
xsuch that the initial price is similar to the current fees... But because the current fees are static, it would need to be based on an average... Calculating this number seems like more complexity than it's worth (as again, these values only really matter shortly after the network upgrade transition).