chia-network / chialisp-web Goto Github PK

The ASSERT_FEE condition documentation currently states:

ASSERT_FEE - [52] - (52 amount): This spend is only valid if there is unused value in this transaction equal to amount, which is explicitly to be used as the fee.

(from https://chialisp.com/docs/coins_spends_and_wallets#conditions)

Emphasis on "equal to" is mine.

Chatting with @Quexington on keybase, he indicated that the actual behaviour here is that ASSERT_FEE asserts that the net amount for the entire block must be >= amount.

What should change in the docs is something like this:

1. Fix it so that it says >= and not equal to
2. Add verbage to clearly indicate the EXACT SCOPE of the assertion (not the puzzle, not the spend bundle, but the whole block!)
3. Change the assertion name. @Quexington feels like RESERVE_FEE is better, but ASSERT_NET_BLOCK_FEE_GE might be more exact (where GE is Greater Equal)

What I'm ultimately after here is some way for my puzzle to assert that the leftover fees (after all my new coin creations) from my puzzle are exactly equal to some value. I can probably do logic checks with ASSERT_MY_AMOUNT, together with values given to CREATE_COIN, but I wanted to give the scope of what caused this issue in case it helps improve docs.

Here seems to be a little error.
brun '(i (= (sha256 2) (q . 0x2cf24dba5fb0a30e26e83b2ac5b9e29e1b161e5c1fa7425e73043362938b9824)) (c (q . 51) (c 5 (c (q . 100) ()))) (q . "wrong password"))' '("hello" 0xdeadbeef)' evaluates to (51 0xdeadbeef 100) and not ((51 0xdeadbeef 100)). Later on in the example the additional cons-operator is added

https://chialisp.com/docs/common_functions#outer-and-inner-puzzles
keybase://chat/chia_network.public#chialisp/6660

As per Quexington in the above Keybase discussion, MOD_HASH is a tree hash of the example code with no curried arguments. This is relevant point to understanding the example, getting it to run and is unclear in the documentation due to omission.

Please consider changing the following from:
"MOD_HASH which is the tree hash of this code"

To:
"MOD_HASH which is the tree hash of this code with no curried arguments"

I believe there is a type in chialisp-web/docs/coins_spends_and_wallets.md on line 101:
"ASSERT_MY_PUZZLE_HASH - [72]" should be "ASSERT_MY_PUZZLEHASH - [72]"

• Sorry to nitpick but ran across it while setting up a syntax highlighter.
  Make it an excellent evening!

brun '(* (q . 2) (q . 4) (q . 5))' '()'
FAIL: rest of non-cons 5

brun '(* (q . 2) (q . 4) (q . 5))' '()'
FAIL: rest of non-cons 5

brun '(+ (q . 10) (q . 20) (q . 30) (q . 40))' '()'
FAIL: rest of non-cons 40

When navigating https://chialisp.com/docs/ in the Basics subsection the reference link to the glossary at the top of the page redirects to https://chialisp.com/docs/ref/clvm/ but at the bottom page under the "End of Section 1" the link to the same webpage is broken https://chialisp.com/docs/chialisp.com/docs/ref/clvm

Locally, line 361 on docs/basics.md redirects correctly but is missing the exclamation mark.

The landing page currently lists an old (and no longer correct) video from 2020 as "A video introduction to developing in Chialisp". From experience, I can state that this is misleading and a bit frustrating. :)

It would probably be better would be to link the more current videos that are on these pages:

• https://chialisp.com/docs/tutorials/developing_applications
• https://chialisp.com/docs/tutorials/programming_chialisp
• and others in that tutorial tree!

• in reference: "the CLVM may be run in "non-strict" mode, which allows" missing the rest of the sentence
• treeargs: i think if you wrote the binary expansion instead of the decimal numbers it would be immediately obvious to everyone how tree numbering works

I think a little bit of clarity could be added to the Introduction page. While it does state that Chialisp compiles into CLVM, it's not totally clear what CLVM is used for. While this is clarified later, it's not immediately obvious in the introduction. Someone visiting this site for the first time should be able to discern quickly that:

• Chia's blockchain uses a lower-level on-chain programming language CLVM
• CLVM is Turing complete and has extensible opcodes, thus allowing any functionality you can dream of
• Absent a hard fork, CLVM will always be Chia's on-chain language
• Chialisp is a higher level language that compiles into CLVM
• Other languages could be developed in the future that also compile into CLVM; however, for now, (nearly) all on-chain programming is done in Chialisp
• Those wishing to create their own smart coins will want to use this site as a reference; they will need to acquire a deep understanding of Chialisp
• Those wanting to create an application that uses existing smart coins will only need a basic understanding of how Chialisp works; most of their development will be done using more familiar languages such as Python, Rust, or Javascript