e7bbfd3913 Improve Psbt error handling (DanGould)
Pull request description:
## Separate `encode::Error` and `psbt::Error` recursive dependency
This initial work attempts to fix#837's first 2 points
> - The current psbt::serialize::Deserialize has an error type of consensus::encode::Error. I think we should cleanly separate consensus encoding errors from application-level encoding errors like psbt.
> - There is a recursive dependence between encode::Error and psbt::Error which would need to be cleanly dissected and separated so that there is no dependence or only one-way dependence.
## Better `ParseError(String)` types
arturomf94 how compatible do your #1310 changes look to address #837's third point with this design?
> - There are a lot ParseError(String) messages that could use a better type to downflow the information.
I think your prior art would completely address this issue now.
## On handling `io::Error` with an associated error
`encode::Error` has an `Io` variant. now that `Psbt::deserialize` returns `psbt::Error` and produces an `io::Error`, we need an `Io` variant on `psbt::Error`. Except that doing so breaks `#[derive(Eq)]` and lots of tests for `psbt::Error`.
Kixunil, I'm trying to understand your feedback regarding a solution to this problem.
> I believe that the best error untangling would be to make decodable error associated.
> I meant having associated `Error` type at `Decodable` trait. Encoding should only fail if the writer fails so we should have `io::Error` there (at least until we have something like `genio`).
>
> > [it] is a problem to instantiate consensus::encode::Error in [the psbt] module for `io::Error`?
>
> It certainly does look strange. Maybe we should have this shared type:
>
> ```rust
> /// Error used when reading or decoding fails.
> pub enum ReadError<Io, Decode> {
> /// Reading failed
> Io(Io),
> /// Decoding failed
> Decode(Decode), // consensus and PSBT error here
> }
> ```
>
> However this one will be annoying to use with `?` :( We could have `ResultExt` to provide `decode()` and `io()` methods to make it easier.
>
> If that's not acceptable then I think deduplicated IO error is better.
Kixunil didn't we just get rid of Psbt as `Decodable`? Would this make more sense to have as an error associated with `Deserialize`? Or did we do the opposite of what we should have by making Psbt only `Serialize`/`Deserialize` because of #934, where only consensus objects are allowed to be `Decodable`? I wonder if we prioritized that strict categorization and are stuck with worth machinery because of it. My goal with #988 was to get to a point where we could address #837 and ultimately implement PSBTv2.
ACKs for top commit:
tcharding:
ACK e7bbfd3913
apoelstra:
ACK e7bbfd3913
Tree-SHA512: 32975594fde42727ea9030f46570a1403ae1a108570ab115519ebeddc28938f141e2134b04d6b29ce94817ed776c13815dea5647c463e4a13b47ba55f4e7858a