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

Create OP Stack comparison matrix #1272

Merged
merged 25 commits into from
Jan 23, 2025
Merged

Create OP Stack comparison matrix #1272

merged 25 commits into from
Jan 23, 2025

Conversation

zainbacchus
Copy link
Contributor

Highlighting common feature questions

Copy link

netlify bot commented Jan 22, 2025

Deploy Preview for docs-optimism ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit ef7c741
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/docs-optimism/deploys/6792d523c0cf55000829da40
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-1272--docs-optimism.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

@zainbacchus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Please do not merge yet - passing to @elihaims @K-Ho to help clean up to facilitate BD convos

@zainbacchus zainbacchus marked this pull request as ready for review January 23, 2025 23:09
@zainbacchus zainbacchus requested a review from a team as a code owner January 23, 2025 23:09
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 23, 2025

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@sbvegan has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 1 minutes and 52 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d180af2 and ef7c741.

📒 Files selected for processing (6)
  • pages/stack/interop.mdx (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/explainer.mdx (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/superchain-erc20.mdx (2 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/tools.mdx (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/tutorials.mdx (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/tutorials/deploy-superchain-erc20.mdx (1 hunks)
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces several changes to the OP Stack documentation. A new metadata entry "fact-sheet": "Fact sheet" has been added to the pages/stack/_meta.json file, indicating the inclusion of a new documentation section. Additionally, a new Markdown file titled "OP Stack Fact Sheet" has been created in the pages/stack/ directory. This document provides an overview of the features associated with the OP Stack, including a technical comparison table that contrasts the capabilities of the Superchain and OP Stack. Furthermore, the document includes footnotes for additional context and references. Other changes involve formatting adjustments in the pages/stack/interop/op-supervisor.mdx file and updates to terminology in words.txt.

Possibly related PRs

  • op-deployer + opcm documentation #934: The changes in pages/stack/_meta.json are related as both PRs involve modifications to JSON metadata files, specifically adding new key-value pairs that enhance the structure and clarity of the metadata.
  • Op deployer updates #1020: This PR updates the documentation for op-deployer, which is relevant as it may interact with the new "fact-sheet" entry in the context of OP Stack documentation.
  • Update Interop OP Supervisor explainer #1266: The update to the OP Supervisor documentation may relate to the overall enhancements in the OP Stack documentation, including the new "fact-sheet" entry that provides additional context for users.

Suggested reviewers

  • krofax

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@zainbacchus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Due to bandwith issues took this over, linked to source data so we can get this over the line and iterate accordingly

@zainbacchus
Copy link
Contributor Author

ty @sbvegan for the review!

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
pages/stack/interop/op-supervisor.mdx (2)

14-22: LGTM! The formatting changes improve readability.

The bullet point hierarchy effectively presents the blockchain heads and their confidence levels. The technical content is accurate and well-structured.

Consider adding a brief explanation of what "reorgs" means in the finalized head description, as this term might not be familiar to all readers:

-    *   Finalized (the latest block written to L1, and that L1 block is safe from reorgs)
+    *   Finalized (the latest block written to L1, and that L1 block is safe from reorganizations/reorgs, meaning it cannot be changed or replaced)

55-62: Fix the sentence spacing in the execution client description.

The content accurately describes component interactions. However, there's a formatting issue in the text.

Apply this formatting fix:

-    To do this, the execution client looks at every executing message and  queries `op-supervisor` to see if there is a corresponding initiating message.
+    To do this, the execution client looks at every executing message and queries `op-supervisor` to see if there is a corresponding initiating message.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~56-~56: Consider a more expressive alternative.
Context: ...is sufficiently safe to include. To do this, the execution client looks at eve...

(DO_ACHIEVE)

words.txt (1)

200-200: Standardize technical term formatting.

Two observations about newly added terms:

  1. Mgas - Consider if this should also have a lowercase variant like other similar terms
  2. viem's - This is the only possessive form in the word list. Consider if we should avoid possessive forms for consistency

Also applies to: 408-408

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 771fc5d and 59bec55.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • pages/stack/_meta.json (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/fact-sheet.mdx (1 hunks)
  • pages/stack/interop/op-supervisor.mdx (2 hunks)
  • words.txt (7 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • pages/stack/_meta.json
  • pages/stack/fact-sheet.mdx
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
pages/stack/interop/op-supervisor.mdx (1)

Pattern **/*.mdx: "ALWAYS review Markdown content THOROUGHLY with the following criteria:

  • Use proper nouns in place of personal pronouns like 'We' and 'Our' to maintain consistency in communal documentation.
  • Avoid gender-specific language and use the imperative form.
  • Monitor capitalization for emphasis. Avoid using all caps, italics, or bold for emphasis.
  • Ensure proper nouns are capitalized in sentences.
  • Apply the Oxford comma.
  • Use proper title case for buttons, tab names, page names, and links. Sentence case should be used for body content and short phrases, even in links.
  • Use correct spelling and grammar at all times (IMPORTANT).
  • For H1, H2, and H3 headers:
    1. Use sentence case, capitalizing only the first word.
    2. Preserve the capitalization of proper nouns, technical terms, and acronyms as defined in the 'nouns.txt' file located in the root directory of the project.
    3. Do not automatically lowercase words that appear in the 'nouns.txt' file, regardless of their position in the header.
  • Flag any headers that seem to inconsistently apply these rules for manual review.
  • When reviewing capitalization, always refer to the 'nouns.txt' file for the correct capitalization of proper nouns and technical terms specific to the project.
    "
🪛 LanguageTool
pages/stack/interop/op-supervisor.mdx

[style] ~56-~56: Consider a more expressive alternative.
Context: ...is sufficiently safe to include. To do this, the execution client looks at eve...

(DO_ACHIEVE)

words.txt

[duplication] ~2-~2: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ACCOUNTQUEUE accountqueue ACCOUNTSLOTS accountslots ADDI ADDIU ADDU airgap Allnodes Allocs ...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~38-~38: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...lockhash blocklists BLOCKLOGS blocklogs BLOCKPROFILERATE blockprofilerate Blockscout Blockspace blockspace blockt...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~41-~41: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...PROFILERATE blockprofilerate Blockscout Blockspace blockspace blocktime Blocktimes blocktimes BLOOMFI...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~44-~44: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...ckscout Blockspace blockspace blocktime Blocktimes blocktimes BLOOMFILTER bloomfilter BLTZ Bootcamp b...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~46-~46: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...ckspace blocktime Blocktimes blocktimes BLOOMFILTER bloomfilter BLTZ Bootcamp bootnode BOOTNODES Bootno...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~408-~408: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...e VHOSTS vhosts Viem viem Viem's viem's VMDEBUG vmdebug VMODULE vmodule xlarge XORI xtensibilit...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~410-~410: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...Viem viem Viem's viem's VMDEBUG vmdebug VMODULE vmodule xlarge XORI xtensibility ZKPs ZKVM Zora...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


[duplication] ~417-~417: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...dule xlarge XORI xtensibility ZKPs ZKVM Zora zora

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: Redirect rules - docs-optimism
  • GitHub Check: Header rules - docs-optimism
  • GitHub Check: Pages changed - docs-optimism
  • GitHub Check: pr-workflow
🔇 Additional comments (2)
words.txt (2)

37-38: Verify the need for both case variations of BLOCKLOGS.

The file includes both uppercase BLOCKLOGS and lowercase blocklogs. While having both cases is common in this file, please verify if both variations are actually used in the codebase.

✅ Verification successful

Both BLOCKLOGS case variations are correctly used

Both uppercase and lowercase variations are necessary as they're used in different contexts:

  • GETH_CACHE_BLOCKLOGS: Environment variable
  • cache.blocklogs: Configuration flag and documentation references
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for both case variations of 'blocklogs' in the codebase
echo "Searching for uppercase BLOCKLOGS:"
rg "BLOCKLOGS" --type-add 'docs:*.{md,mdx}' --type docs

echo -e "\nSearching for lowercase blocklogs:"
rg "blocklogs" --type-add 'docs:*.{md,mdx}' --type docs

Length of output: 702

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[duplication] ~38-~38: Möglicher Tippfehler: ein Wort wird wiederholt
Context: ...lockhash blocklists BLOCKLOGS blocklogs BLOCKPROFILERATE blockprofilerate Blockscout Blockspace blockspace blockt...

(GERMAN_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)


361-361: Verify the technical accuracy of the term "subsecond".

The newly added term "subsecond" should be verified for its technical accuracy and usage in the documentation. Consider if it should be "sub-second" instead, which is a more common spelling.

✅ Verification successful

"subsecond" is the correct form for this project

The term "subsecond" is already in use within the project's technical documentation, specifically in the context of blockchain technology. This spelling variant maintains consistency with existing usage.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for both variants to determine which is more commonly used
echo "Searching for 'subsecond':"
rg "subsecond" --type-add 'docs:*.{md,mdx}' --type docs

echo -e "\nSearching for 'sub-second':"
rg "sub-second" --type-add 'docs:*.{md,mdx}' --type docs

Length of output: 483

Copy link
Collaborator

@sbvegan sbvegan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ty zain!

@sbvegan sbvegan merged commit ec8c9ac into main Jan 23, 2025
8 checks passed
@sbvegan sbvegan deleted the zainbacchus-patch-3 branch January 23, 2025 23:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants