Skip to content
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

Point users to `bip143::SighashComponents` #404

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

@dpc
Copy link
Contributor

dpc commented Jan 28, 2020

An unaware user might try to use signature_hash for segwit signatures,
and not be aware of bip143.

An unaware user might try to use `signature_hash` for segwit signatures,
and not be aware of bip143.
@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

codecov-io commented Jan 28, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #404 into master will decrease coverage by 0.9%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #404      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.98%   85.08%   -0.91%     
==========================================
  Files          40       40              
  Lines        8083     7360     -723     
==========================================
- Hits         6950     6262     -688     
+ Misses       1133     1098      -35
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/blockdata/transaction.rs 93.92% <ø> (-0.74%) ⬇️
src/util/psbt/mod.rs 86.06% <0%> (-3.71%) ⬇️
src/blockdata/script.rs 78.59% <0%> (-2.56%) ⬇️
src/util/address.rs 86.31% <0%> (-1.57%) ⬇️
src/util/base58.rs 80.68% <0%> (-1.48%) ⬇️
src/util/endian.rs 91.04% <0%> (-1.27%) ⬇️
src/util/psbt/map/output.rs 62.16% <0%> (-1%) ⬇️
src/util/uint.rs 83.65% <0%> (-0.75%) ⬇️
src/util/contracthash.rs 78.5% <0%> (-0.53%) ⬇️
... and 17 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 1b946b0...9d86f52. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

apoelstra left a comment

lgtm

@stevenroose

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

stevenroose commented Feb 4, 2020

Didn't @instagibbs just PR'd a change that deprecated SighashComponents in favor of a more generalized (and lazily calculated) SighashCache?

Copy link
Collaborator

stevenroose left a comment

Please change to use SighashCache as per #390.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.