Fix formatting and bug in pseudocode in patricia-merkle-trie
#14486
Conversation
Prior to the change the doc wasn't formatted for Python code, even though mostly Python syntax is used,
which might've lead to decrease in comprehension as the syntax wasn't highlighted.
All the code was formatted with the Black formatter to ease comprehension.
Additionally, the following line contained bug:
```python
if node = '': return ''
```
The comparison operator (==) was likely meant.
Privat33r-dev
requested review from
wackerow,
corwintines,
pettinarip and
minimalsm
as code owners
✅ Deploy Preview for ethereumorg ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
|
| GitGuardian id | GitGuardian status | Secret | Commit | Filename | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | Generic High Entropy Secret | 602d37b | src/data/community-events.json | View secret |
🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets
- Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
- Replace and store your secret safely. Learn here the best practices.
- Revoke and rotate this secret.
- If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.
To avoid such incidents in the future consider
- following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
- install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.
If this detection is a false positive, please contact Oleh Vasylenko (@Aldekein) to fix it in the GitGuardian dashboard.
🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.
|
@Aldekein I guess that it is a false positive. It's not even a part of the PR. |
Prior to the change the doc wasn't formatted for Python code, even though mostly Python syntax is used, which might've lead to decrease in comprehension as the syntax wasn't highlighted.
All the code was formatted with the Black formatter to ease comprehension.
Additionally, the following line contained bug:
The comparison operator (==) was likely meant.
Description
Related Issue