831b0267de Use contains() instead of manual range (Tobin C. Harding)
6410095687 Use chunks_exact (Tobin C. Harding)
3a0097ba49 Use trim_start_matches (Tobin C. Harding)
0a19710906 Use vec! macro instead of new followed by push (Tobin C. Harding)
Pull request description:
Now that 0.28 is out we do not need to support Rust 1.29 on `master`.
Remove trivial MSRV `TODO`s from the code. (All these changes only rely on MSRV bumping to 1.31 so are easily within bounds.)
ACKs for top commit:
Kixunil:
ACK 831b0267de
sanket1729:
ACK 831b0267de
Tree-SHA512: f1ea594216ba7dfa24696b964ce296a8aea72dd2e16e11d3a43fe8b90c851abf59b1612b2b1311146e8070112f3834762584e4f0515b8f546f72af169eb4bda9
5afb0eaf40 API to get an iterator for funding utxos in psbt (violet360)
Pull request description:
### Current status
The API returns a vector of UTXOs and has return type `Result<Vec<&TxOut>, Error>`
### Expected
The return statement should be of type `sighash::Prevouts` as pointed in #849
ACKs for top commit:
Kixunil:
ACK 5afb0eaf40
tcharding:
ACK 5afb0eaf40
sanket1729:
ACK 5afb0eaf40. Thanks for being patient with this.
Tree-SHA512: 724fc3dffdbb1331584f89bbe84527e1af0d193a344fe43b36f2f2a628652d259001a3abf6b3909df53524cd3fbdbe3af760b7004d40d3bee1848fbb83efff5b
f92854a805 Add PSBT alias (Tobin Harding)
Pull request description:
Programmers are inherently lazy and for good reason. I'm yet to see
anyone write `PartiallySignedTransaction` in code that uses
`rust-bitcoin`, its too obvious to add a type alias for PSBTs, let's
just do it ourselves to save everyone else having to do so.
Add public type alias `Psbt` for `PartiallySignedTransaction`.
ACKs for top commit:
apoelstra:
ACK f92854a805
sanket1729:
ACK f92854a805
Tree-SHA512: 1f56ac236d34a89bbb557ada147f05d8a8ce961dad3ad921f10f26c597b91ecc8e15070f8825774745e5333ba5282962830a3cc0c53b93f147be93ab566b1b9e
c97589f8de Fix TapTree derserialization (sanket1729)
Pull request description:
Trees should only be serialized if both of the following conditions
hold:
1) Tree is complete binary tree(is_finalized)
2) Tree does not have any hidden nodes
ACKs for top commit:
tcharding:
ACK c97589f8de
apoelstra:
ACK c97589f8de
Tree-SHA512: 33d16f2d532cb24acba4ab847d493e550f7b279567678f3f2cd7e4161dea8b720a0e35be32b6c506e467c3526a29042aad8f4b5f45133b9a32028d4ee6a48f8e
In the future, TapTree may iterate over different node types, and that's why it does not have `iter()` function; using instead `script_leafs`. Thus, we should not have IntoIterator implementation as well
Previously used depth and script tuple missed information about the leaf version.
All three comprises already existing type `LeafInfo` which was made public in
previous commits.
Programmers are inherently lazy and for good reason. I'm yet to see
anyone write `PartiallySignedTransaction` in code that uses
`rust-bitcoin`, its too obvious to add a type alias for PSBTs, let's
just do it ourselves to save everyone else having to do so.
Add public type alias `Psbt` for `PartiallySignedTransaction`.
Trees should only be serialized if both of the following conditions
hold:
1) Tree is complete binary tree(is_finalized)
2) Tree does not have any hidden nodes
c036b0db6f Unit test for failing TapTree on builder containing hidden nodes. (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
77715311cf Prevent TapTree from hidden parts (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
b0f3992db1 Rename TaprootBuilder::is_complete into is_finalized (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
efa800fb1f Make TapTree::from_inner return a proper error type (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
e24c6e23e3 TapTree serialization roundtrip unit test (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
56adfa4527 TaprootBuilder::has_hidden_nodes method (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
e69701e089 Rename taproot `*_hidden` API into `*_hidden_nodes` (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
6add0dd9dc Track information about hidden leaves in taproot NodeInfo (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
Pull request description:
Closes#928
ACKs for top commit:
sanket1729:
ACK c036b0db6f. Reviewed the range diff
apoelstra:
ACK c036b0db6f
Tree-SHA512: 3a8193e6d6dd985da30a2094d1111471b5971f422525870003b77b6ac47cd4ad6e718d46a6d86bbb5e92e5253ac53804badf67edd98bbccbdc11e6383c675663
46c34b3fb7 Fix code comments referring to sighash (Tobin Harding)
8f36c3979c Use sighash not sig_hash in identifiers (Tobin Harding)
c3a167b96b Rename SigHash -> Sighash (Tobin Harding)
52b711c084 Rename InvalidSigHashType -> InvalidSighashType (Tobin Harding)
b84f25584e Rename SigHashCache -> SighashCache (Tobin Harding)
e37652578b Rename PsbtSigHashType -> PsbtSighashType (Tobin Harding)
c19ec339ef Rename NonStandardSigHashType -> NonStandardSighashType (Tobin Harding)
130e27349e Rename SigHashTypeParseError -> SighashTypeParseError (Tobin Harding)
6caba2ed24 Rename SchnorrSigHashType -> SchnorrSighashType (Tobin Harding)
5522454583 Rename EcdsaSigHashType -> EcdsaSighashType (Tobin Harding)
Pull request description:
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash' is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in identifiers as `Sighash`.
Change various types, variants, and code comments to use sighash as a single word.
- Patches 1-8 are code changes `s/SigHash/Sighash/g`
- Patch 9 is code changes `s/sig_hash/sighash/g`
- Patch 11 is docs fixes
Fixes: #911
## Note to reviewers
I've been particularly pedantic with the patch separation because we are so close to release.
Done as separate patches to make review easier if review is to be done by reading the diffs. Perhaps at least one person could verify this PR programmatically by doing
- Reset the last 2 patches (those are easy to do manually)
- Check out master
- Do `s/SigHash/Sighash/g` on all source files (bash function below)
- Use `git diff branchA..branchB` to verify
The difference between the two branches should only include comment lines (last three patches) and these seven instances of `SigHash:
```
CHANGELOG.md:82:- [Add FromStr/Display implementation for SigHashType](a4a7035a94)
CHANGELOG.md:93:- [Introduce `SigHashCache` structure](https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/pull/390) to replace `SighashComponents` and support all sighash modes
CHANGELOG.md:121: - `SigHash`
src/blockdata/transaction.rs:1190: "SigHash_None",
src/blockdata/transaction.rs:1191: "SigHash_NONE",
src/util/sighash.rs:1175: "SigHash_None",
src/util/sighash.rs:1176: "SigHash_NONE",
```
In case its useful, the shell function I used to do these changes is:
```bash
function search-and-replace() {
if (($# != 2))
then
echo "Usage: $0 <this> <that>"
return
fi
local this="$1"
local that="$2"
# For all files containing $this, replace $this with $that.
for file in $(git grep -l "$this")
do
perl -pi -e "s/$this/$that/g" "$file"
done
}
```
ACKs for top commit:
dr-orlovsky:
ACK 46c34b3fb7
apoelstra:
ACK 46c34b3fb7
Tree-SHA512: fe7e25e9cfb5155e4921de5ac185dbf9f4ca0770846d7892f6968b44fc5431f3f1a183380107449e90f7ea662094c60b118dc0468230384e8f9a8ef98d5ee0a0
Recently we added a bunch of additional sighash types, some of the code
comments became stale. Use the non-specific term 'sighash type' instead
of a particular sighash identifier in comments to make the comments more
applicable.
Recently we update all types and docs to use `Sighash` instead of
`SigHash` because 'sighash' is a single word. We should apply the same
logic to functions and variable names.
Do not use an underscore in the identifier 'sighash'.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename the `InvalidSigHashType` variant to `InvalidSighashType`.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename `PsbtSigHashType` to `PsbtSighashType`.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename the `NonStandardSigHashType` type and error variant to
`NonStandardSighashType`.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename `SigHashTypeParseError` to `SighashTypeParseError`.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename `SchnorrSigHashType` to `SchnorrSighashType`.
Our usage of `SigHash` implies that 'sighash' is _two_ words; 'sighash'
is a well known word in the Bitcoin ecosystem it should appear in
identifiers as `Sighash`.
Rename `EcdsaSigHashType` to `EcdsaSighashType`.
992857ad0a PsbtSighashType unit tests (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
5be1cdb8c7 PsbtSigHashType Display and FromStr implementation (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
7cdcdaad6c Support SIGHASH_RESERVED in SchnorrSigHashType::from_u8 (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
Pull request description:
The newly introduced `PsbtSigHashType` uses very different serde formatting from previously used `EcdsaSigHashType`; for instance it does not output human-readable sighash. This is especially obvious when printing out PSBT as JSON/YAML object and is a breaking change from the `0.27`. Serde human-readable implementation requires `Display/FromStr`, which were also absent.
ACKs for top commit:
sanket1729:
ACK 992857ad0a. This is much better
apoelstra:
ACK 992857ad0a
Tree-SHA512: 71a46471f34b5481e4c1273a66846f59d61bfd98fcb65e7823ca216ff0dd419d81ca86d99c7aaf674fcfe2b1c010e899c8e74328f60a1e809015c663c453cc89
e27f8ff594 TapTree iterator implementation (Dr Maxim Orlovsky)
Pull request description:
Implemented after @sanket1729 suggestion in https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/issues/895#issuecomment-1074366108
Iterates all scripts present in TapTree in DFS order returning `(depth, script)` pairs.
I propose to have it as an RC fix since this functionality is really lacking and may be required for many wallets working with Taproot PSBT even outside of the scope where I originally needed it (OP_RETURN tweaks for TapTree described in #895)
ACKs for top commit:
sanket1729:
utACK e27f8ff594.
apoelstra:
ACK e27f8ff594
Tree-SHA512: b398e468a10534561297f22dba47e340391069734a41999edd85d726890752035053690a22014402879ea40b948160f00310f78771443d382c0bbaf0201dfbe5
It is possible, although not immediately obvious, that it is possible to
create a `PsbtSigHashType` with a non-standard value.
Add a unit test to show this and also catch any regressions if we
accidental change this logic.
Improve the `PsbtSigHashType` conversion methods by doing:
- Re-name `inner` -> `to_u32` as per Rust convention
- Add `from_u32` method
Note, we explicitly do _not_ use suffix 'consensus' because these
conversion methods make no guarantees about the validity of the
underlying `u32`.
The functions `from_u32_standard` and `from_u32_consensus` smell a bit
like hungarian notation. We can look at the method definition to see
that the methods accept `u32` arguments without mentioning that in the
method names.
Remove `_u32_` from the method names. This brings the `from_*` methods
in line with the `to_standard` method also.
The exact code formatting we use is not as important as uniformity.
Since we do not use tooling to control the formatting we have to be
vigilant ourselves. Recently I (Tobin) changed the way default type
parameters were formatted (arbitrarily but uniformly). Turns out I
picked the wrong way, there is already a convention as shown in the rust
documentation online (e.g. [1]).
Use 'conventional' spacing for default type parameters. Make the change
across the whole repository, found using
git grep '\<.* = .*\>'
[1] - https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch19-03-advanced-traits.html
In this library we specifically do not use rustfmt and tend to favour
terse statements that do not use extra lines unnecessarily. In order to
help new devs understand the style modify code that seems to use an
unnecessary number of lines.
None of these changes should reduce the readability of the code.
Do various whitespace refactorings, of note:
- Use space around equals e.g., 'since = "blah"'
- Put return/break/continue on separate line
Whitespace only, no logic changes.
sanket1729
Tobin C. Harding
violet360
Andrew Poelstra
Dr Maxim Orlovsky