Optional access list in BlobTx unmarshaling

[Inphi]

This allows users and the internal ethapi to return blob transactions containing a nil access list.

[roberto-bayardo]

did you want to make the same change for blob versioned hashes?

[Inphi]

did you want to make the same change for blob versioned hashes?

it's not necessary. we
already don't assert that the blob versioned hashes are not nil.

[roberto-bayardo]

did you want to make the same change for blob versioned hashes?

it's not necessary. we already don't assert that the blob versioned hashes are not nil.

But if they are nil they will pass through as nil right? I was wondering if we should be forcing them to empty lists.

[Inphi]

I was thinking perhaps we should enforce non-nil blob versioned hashes. As it's more likely that if nil then an invalid API use. And with the new gnark-kzg, one can't even verify a blob transaction containing zero blobs (and thus zero versioned hashes). blob versioned hash, like the base fee, seems more like a salient attribute of blob transactions that should always be explicitly set and never be nil.

[roberto-bayardo]

I was thinking perhaps we should enforce non-nil blob versioned hashes. As it's more likely that if nil then an invalid API use. And with the new gnark-kzg, one can't even verify a blob transaction containing zero blobs (and thus zero versioned hashes). blob versioned hash, like the base fee, seems more like a salient attribute of blob transactions that should always be explicitly set and never be nil.

Sgtm