Georg Schneider

In another case I got back an additional error (before the one described above appeared): ``` { "kind": "DecoderError", "input": [ { "archived": { "contractId": "00bf7f99faacb2c8d609b7cc02189555325f9878fbcadc28ac19dfd04fd2fba2f4ca00122093fdada3b2c8e1c3c9135c20414fe31a9d270e66cbc83a426906399c33cb8e82", "templateId": "8e0e4f359d0f65be65883ff8bd047511f33b97b0ead9d6b47e10a681879e95f7:Daml.Finance.Holding.Fungible:Fungible" } },...

@S11001001 Yes, sorry I didn't think about it when merging. The branch is now restored, check out commit `92f3869eac2773029d989f3c3952eff2007d9bf6` on it to reproduce.

I understand that Canton support for this is WIP, I'll leave it to the team to close this or not

I don't think we would introduce another intermediate representation from DAML. If anything we would directly generate bytecode from DAML-LF. But we haven't pursued this approach further.

No, I meant generate Java bytecode directly from DAML-LF, which is our intermediate representation

Should also cover: how to obtain the library and integrate into app pipeline (point to / explain get-dependencies in quickstarter)

Idea: visual explanation of core workflows

@matteolimberto-da what visibility assumptions did you have in mind here?

@lucianojoublanc-da : Couple of random thoughts: What do we mean by 'latest' when a instrument has optionality, e.g. a convetible bond? It sounds like what we need is a Time...

@johan-da : I would think approach 1 ^^ together with a Time -> Instrument (to get the prevailing version at delivery time) would be best. A future contract could then...