-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove required electrum resolver #23
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0c22d86
wallet: fix keychain indexes enumberated by RgbWallet::with
dr-orlovsky a17c0b1
wallet: remove required resolver for RgbWallet construction
dr-orlovsky b0ccaa1
wallet: remove resolver from Runtime
dr-orlovsky 4501e26
runtime: remove STDOUT prints outside of cli tool
dr-orlovsky 143447f
ci: add no default features build
dr-orlovsky 5ced834
runtime: fix no-defaults build
dr-orlovsky File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we really need to take the resolver as a mutable reference? By looking to the code I cannot see where there's the need to change the struct. Making it immutable it would simplify its usage.
Same question applies to all runtime methods that take the resolver as a mutable reference
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason is that I assume resolver can be a caching resolver, significantly improving validation performance. I mean for the first time the resolver is asked for certain tx it goes to electrum/esplora, caches the answer - and the next time it uses the cache. Such a resolver need to be mutable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So right now it's not necessary but in the near future it will be, therefore it makes sense defining it as a mutable reference right away
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, since otherwise it will be hard to adopt change to mutable type downstream in the future - and introduction of a simple caching resolver (which is trivial to do as a wrapper type and is not a breaking change) will become a breaking change requiring major version increase.