Skip to content

Add line about block hashes inconsistencies in the docs [skip ci]#868

Merged
3alpha merged 1 commit intomainfrom
doc-block-hash-inconistencies
Oct 7, 2025
Merged

Add line about block hashes inconsistencies in the docs [skip ci]#868
3alpha merged 1 commit intomainfrom
doc-block-hash-inconistencies

Conversation

@3alpha
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@3alpha 3alpha commented Oct 2, 2025 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

Resolved #866

Usage related changes

Development related changes

Checklist:

  • Checked out the contribution guidelines
  • Applied formatting - ./scripts/format.sh
  • No linter errors - ./scripts/clippy_check.sh
  • No unused dependencies - ./scripts/check_unused_deps.sh
  • No spelling errors - ./scripts/check_spelling.sh
  • Performed code self-review
  • Rebased to the latest commit of the target branch (or merged it into my branch)
    • Once you make the PR reviewable, please avoid force-pushing
  • Updated the docs if needed - ./website/README.md
  • Linked the issues resolvable by this PR - linking info
  • Updated the tests if needed; all passing - execution info

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Clarified that devnet block hashes can differ from mainnet due to missing block fields on devnet, even though the same hashing algorithm is used.
    • Added an explanatory note to help users interpret hash discrepancies between networks and avoid confusion during comparisons.
    • Improved guidance for troubleshooting and understanding network-specific behavior in block hash outputs.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 2, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

A single documentation change was made in website/docs/intro.md. One line was added explaining that devnet block hashes differ from mainnet because certain mainnet block fields are unavailable on devnet, resulting in different hash outputs despite using the same hashing algorithm. No code or logic changes were made.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description Check ⚠️ Warning The pull request description includes the required section headings but lacks any substantive content under “Usage related changes” and “Development related changes,” leaving those sections as unfilled placeholders rather than describing how the documentation update affects users or developers. While the checklist is fully checked off, the template’s key sections remain empty, preventing evaluators from understanding the practical impact of the change. This makes the description incomplete against the repository’s standards. Please provide concrete details under the “Usage related changes” and “Development related changes” headings to explain how adding the block hash inconsistency note affects end users and developers.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title Check ✅ Passed The title directly summarizes the primary change by stating that a line about block hash inconsistencies was added to the documentation and accurately reflects the diff in the intro.md file, and the inclusion of “[skip ci]” is a common convention that does not obscure the intent. It is clear, concise, and tied to the actual content update. A reviewer scanning history would immediately understand the main purpose of this PR.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch doc-block-hash-inconistencies
📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b07aa33 and d371060.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • website/docs/intro.md (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
website/docs/intro.md (1)

18-18: Clear and helpful clarification.

This extra note concisely explains the hash discrepancy and should prevent confusion for users comparing devnet with mainnet. Nicely done.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@3alpha
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

3alpha commented Oct 2, 2025

@coderabbitai review

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 2, 2025

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

@3alpha 3alpha merged commit b1f0252 into main Oct 7, 2025
1 check passed
@3alpha 3alpha deleted the doc-block-hash-inconistencies branch October 7, 2025 08:29
@3alpha 3alpha added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Oct 17, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Update docs with caveat on hash inequivalence

1 participant

@3alpha