Remove unneeded ScriptHash in PReferenceScript/SReferenceScript

[carbolymer]

Changelog

- description: |
    <insert-changelog-description-here>
# uncomment types applicable to the change:
  type:
  # - feature        # introduces a new feature
  # - breaking       # the API has changed in a breaking way
  # - compatible     # the API has changed but is non-breaking
  # - optimisation   # measurable performance improvements
  # - refactoring    # QoL changes
  # - bugfix         # fixes a defect
  # - test           # fixes/modifies tests
  # - maintenance    # not directly related to the code
  # - release        # related to a new release preparation
  # - documentation  # change in code docs, haddocks...

Context

Additional context for the PR goes here. If the PR fixes a particular issue please provide a link to the issue.

How to trust this PR

Highlight important bits of the PR that will make the review faster. If there are commands the reviewer can run to observe the new behavior, describe them.

Checklist

• Commit sequence broadly makes sense and commits have useful messages
• New tests are added if needed and existing tests are updated. See Running tests for more details
• Self-reviewed the diff

[Jimbo4350]

We need a new data definition.

fetchReferenceMintingScriptWitness :: UTxO era -> ScriptWitness WitCtxMint era -> UpdatedReferenceScriptWitness

and in the case where the user chooses to supply it

updateReferenceScriptWitness :: PolicyId -> ScriptWitness WitCtxMint era -> UpdatedReferenceScriptWitness

Propagating Maybe PolicyId may work but it results in poor readability. If the user does not supply the policy id we want the ability to query the UTxO to get the reference script witnesses so we can calculate the policy ID.

[Jimbo4350]

This would be the short to medium term fix until we can figure out how to encapsulate this in cardano-api.

[carbolymer]

I agree about the first case with fetchReferenceMintingScriptWitness. I'd do this in a follow-up PR.

What is not clear to me is how to thread in Maybe PolicyId from the CLI argument parser to this place in a clean way. What's your idea about this scenario, when the user provides Maybe PolicyId manually?

[Jimbo4350]

I would start with something like: data MintingReferenceScriptWitness era = MintingReferenceScriptWitness PolicyId (ScriptWitness WitCtxMint era)

I'd do this in a follow-up PR.

In this instance I would insist its done in this PR.

[Jimbo4350]

No worries, let me push some changes tomorrow to make sure what I am suggesting can actually work.

[carbolymer]

I've removed my comment as I'm still wrapping my head around the idea and experimenting with it. Feel free to push.