Open Eikix opened 3 months ago
As maintainer, I hereby name this SNIP, SNIP-19
Could we discuss including this SNIP in a later upgrade @ArielElp
Hi @Eikix,
Thanks for the submission! I’ve reviewed the SNIP, and here are some changes needed:
Please add the following missing fields: description, discussions-to (please link to your community forum post), type, and category. You can refer to the SNIP-1 guidelines for details on these fields.
The Rationale section is mandatory. This section should explain the reasoning behind the design choices and describe any alternatives considered. Since people often confuse this with the Motivation section, remember that Motivation explains the problem you're solving, while Rationale explains the choices behind the solution. While I understand there might not be extensive design considerations for this SNIP, the Rationale section is still required. If there aren’t many considerations, you can keep it brief or even state that no major design alternatives were necessary.
Please rename the "Implementation" section to "Reference Implementation" as per the SNIP format.
Every SNIP needs a Security Considerations section, even if there are no security implications (in which case, you can simply state that).
Thanks!
Hi all!
Creating a PR for my first SNIP, advised by @LucasLvy from Starkware. I think the community stands to benefit from a
get_class_hash_at
syscall to be able to query onchain the class hash of a contract.This is akin to EVM
EXTCODEHASH
andEXTCODESIZE
opcodes, that enable to check the deployed code of a contract against a known code hash.