Move the taproot module to crate root #1373
Conversation
|
\me whispers excitedly merge merge merge merge merge |
|
@tcharding sorry, this needs a rebase! It looks like #1381 caused a conflict :( |
bbad1af to
b6eed32
Compare
|
Rebased! Felt so good to see |
b6eed32 to
676f9c2
Compare
676f9c2 to
4309108
Compare
|
Rebased, no other changes. |
|
No changes since you last ack'ed @Kixunil, here is the range diff command for you to verify what I say, can I get another ack please |
We are trying to flatten the `util` module. The `taproot` module can live in the crate root. If/when we create a `crypto` module/crate we may wish to pull some stuff out of this module but for now moving it gets us closer to removing `util` without making the directory structure any worse. Includes adding rustfmt attributes to skip formatting of macros.
Run `cargo +nightly fmt` and commit changes to the `taproot` module. No manual changes, only those introduced by `rustfmt`.
4309108 to
dce88b0
Compare
|
Rebased and added |
| if let Some(Some(node)) = self.branch.pop() { | ||
| Ok(TaprootSpendInfo::from_node_info(secp, internal_key, node)) | ||
| } else { | ||
| unreachable!("Size checked above. Builder guarantees the last element is Some") | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I may be paranoid but this style seems to ask for heartbleed-style vulnerability.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Heh, I agree it feels a bit treacherous, but Rust will at least require you put something (not just whitespace) before any following lines of code, so you can't be easily fooled into mistaking which block it belongs to.
We are trying to flatten the
utilmodule. Thetaprootmodule can live in the crate root. If/when we create acryptomodule/crate we may wish to pull some stuff out of this module but for now moving it gets us closer to removingutilwithout making the directory structure any worse.CC sanket1729, I did this after reviewing the
taprootmodule during work on #1260 and your review comment.