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.

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

chore(docs): mathspec v1 #67

Merged
merged 23 commits into from
Jan 13, 2025
Merged

chore(docs): mathspec v1 #67

merged 23 commits into from
Jan 13, 2025

Conversation

3esmit
Copy link
Contributor

@3esmit 3esmit commented Oct 20, 2024

Description

While this still not in a good shape for GitHub, token economics can review the preview as an exported PDF:
Mathematical Specification of Staking Protocol.pdf

Implements #56

A formal mathematical specification on the staking protocol, agnostic of implementation details.
Another spec might be necessary to express the specific implementation details.

Checks

  • Verify if specification is aligned with Token Economics
  • Verify if all formulas are correct
  • Verify if the state logic is correct
  • Verify if is easy to understand
  • Verify formatting is good for GitHub
  • Verify for spelling mistakes

@3esmit 3esmit self-assigned this Oct 20, 2024
@3esmit 3esmit marked this pull request as draft October 20, 2024 01:19
@3esmit
Copy link
Contributor Author

3esmit commented Oct 20, 2024

Turns out GitHub wont accept the math formulas in some contexts, such as inside bullet points (why GitHub? others accept it fine) so I will reformat it in a way is still good looking but dont need to use bullet points, to do that I wll have to revisit all the way the document is formatted to find another way of representing the topics.

@3esmit 3esmit marked this pull request as ready for review December 21, 2024 04:23
@3esmit
Copy link
Contributor Author

3esmit commented Dec 21, 2024

I'll rebase and squash this once its reviewed.

Copy link
Collaborator

@0x-r4bbit 0x-r4bbit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's best to merge this as is.

@gravityblast @mart1n-xyz any objections?

@3esmit 3esmit merged commit 26f76d4 into main Jan 13, 2025
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants