We implement `source` for all our error types. This means that we should
not display the source error explicitly because users can call `source`
to get the source error.
However, `std::Error::source()` is only available for "std" builds, so
that we do not loose the error source information in "no-std" builds add
a macro that conditionally adds the source onto the error message.
97a5bb1439 Implement std::error::source codebase wide (Tobin C. Harding)
0a9191b429 Add parenthesis around left hand side of companion (Tobin C. Harding)
7cf8af2f86 Put Error impl block below Display (Tobin C. Harding)
2384712364 Re-order Display match arms (Tobin C. Harding)
Pull request description:
Now that we have MSRV of 1.41.1 we should use `source` instead of `cause`. Audit the whole codebase and implement `source` for _every_ error type we have.
The first three patches are preparatory cleanup, patch 3 is particularly shameful (adds parenthesis to make my editor work).
CC @Kixunil because he is championing the error stuff.
ACKs for top commit:
apoelstra:
ACK 97a5bb1439
Tree-SHA512: 46313a28929445f32e01e30ca3b0246b30bc9d5e43db5754d4b441e9c30d3e427efaf247100eb6b452f98beec5a4fcde1daba7943a772114aa34f78ab52cbc60
Parenthesis are not needed around this expression but my editor is going
mad and cannot format the code without them. Since it does not hurt
readability add parenthesis around the expression.
Since commit `commit 275adc6c335a4326699cfbd444949e1725864ea1` on
`bitcoin_hashes` we have the identical implementation of the macro
`sha256t1_hash_newtype` in this crate and in `bitcoin_hashes`.
Remove the `sha256t_hash_newtype` macro from this crate in favour of the
one in `bitcoin_hashes`.
Use cargo to upgrade from edition 2015 to edition 2018.
cargo fix --edition
No manual changes made. The result of the command above is just to fix
all the use statements (add `crate::`) and fix the fully qualified path
formats i.e., `::Foo` -> `crate::Foo`.
7969b7a43e Make TaprooBuilder::finalize able to return keyspend only (Jeremy Rubin)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
JeremyRubin:
> ACK 7969b7a
sanket1729:
ACK 7969b7a43e
apoelstra:
ACK 7969b7a43e
Tree-SHA512: 26d0b730590f610a858061394faafaa74b13dd353f34ccf1c6166d0cbb62937010eed5661a887f7bea4f983ac9eab8cdca10a5fe7bd74f2dd5701a7782cbac64
da731c4825 Add further description to the NodeInfo struct (Tobin Harding)
492ccebd99 Use links for error types (Tobin Harding)
3e05887579 Use 'the' to improve sentence (Tobin Harding)
Pull request description:
See to nits from review of https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/pull/912
Three minor patches to the `taproot` module docs.
CC @dr-orlovsky
ACKs for top commit:
dr-orlovsky:
ACK da731c4825
sanket1729:
ACK da731c4825
Tree-SHA512: 17a27a19c88f9baa8127023b2ee30fc2259cb0058a92dc9d8ae595e9e02ccb047fefcba7548ff7900fffa7bc6853447183e80660b8756d90d055ab8aa96ae938
As has been done in other places in the codebase; improve the docs in
the `taproot` module by doing:
- Use full sentences (capital letters + full stops)
- Use back ticks and links for types where appropriate
- Fix grammar
- Fix stale docs
- Use third person for describing functions
- Use 100 character line width
- Use markdown sections (`# Examples`, `# Returns`) where appropriate
- Separate brief heading from extended description when appropriate
- Use `///` for all functions/types (both private and public)
I also did:
- Build the docs and check all the links
- Read all the built docs, check for sanity and pretty-ness
208eb65f1b Make NodeInfo API public (sanket1729)
Pull request description:
Reported by @shesek. Users might find it convenient to manually construct the tree using `NodeInfo` API
```rust
let leaf1 = NodeInfo::from_leaf_with_ver();
let leaf2 = NodeInfo::from_leaf_with_ver();
let root = NodeInfo::combine(leaf1, leaf2);
let spend_info = TaprootSpendInfo::from_node_info(&secp, internal_key, root);
```
ACKs for top commit:
dr-orlovsky:
ACK 208eb65f1b
apoelstra:
ACK 208eb65f1b
Tree-SHA512: b5a6b26e0d4a637f7ad6e987976b31b00d3567feca85f1a0bf63aa03603aded0ddae6578b1cabc1056870a596b8cb1a83e4ef3f45802e03da80c3d58d9bab1f1
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.
Our usage of `where` statements is not uniform, nor is it inline with
the typical layout suggested by `rustfmt`.
Make an effort to be more uniform with usage of `where` statements.
However, explicitly do _not_ do every usage since sometimes our usage
favours terseness (all on a single line).
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.
Update our `rust-secp256k1` dependency to the latest version.
Requires doing:
- Add a new variant to `Error` for the case where parity of the internal
key is an invalid value (not 0 or 1).
- Use non-deprecated const
Changes the API from TweakedPublicKey to XonlyPublicKey. I believe we
introduced TweakedPublicKey to guard against creating address API. This
is confusing because when we want to verify control block we have to
call dangerous_assume_tweak.
This is in true in most cases that the key would be tweaked, but we only
want to guard in while creating a new address. If we want to verify
blocks, we should deal with native X-only-keys regardless of how they
were created
Rust convention is to use `to_` for conversion methods that convert from
an owned type to an owned `Copy` type. `into_` is for owned to owned
non-`Copy` types.
Re-name conversion methods that use `into_` for `Copy` types to use
`to_`, no need to deprecate these ones because they are unreleased.
Tobin C. Harding
Andrew Poelstra
sanket1729
Dr Maxim Orlovsky
Jeremy Rubin
Riccardo Casatta
KaFai Choi