docs: clarify intelligent contract size expectations - #450
Draft
MuncleUscles wants to merge 2 commits into
Draft
MuncleUscles wants to merge 2 commits into
MuncleUscles wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for genlayer-docs ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Contributor
|
Important Draft PR not reviewedDraft PRs are not automatically reviewed by default.
To automatically review draft PRs, update your CodeRabbit configuration: reviews:
auto_review:
drafts: trueThanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Hmm |
✅ Deploy Preview for genlayer-docs ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Sanitized evidence basis
Recent builder/support discussion showed confusion about whether EVM bytecode-size limits apply to large GenLayer contracts. A follow-up builder report described a large Bradbury/Studio Next deployment that returned a transaction hash but did not mine while small deployments from the same wallet worked; the builder was unblocked by splitting the source into gas-safe chunks with a bootstrapper-style approach. Existing deployment docs did not cover this symptom or mitigation.
Test plan
pnpm build✅Note: Created by weekly docs-and-skills gap loop; draft for human review.