Combine near-duplicate Utxo creation functions #2467
Merged
Conversation
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
teor2345
added
A-rust
teor2345
force-pushed
the
dedup-utxo-creation
branch
from
c7e1a0f to
1cb101a
Compare
|
We need to merge PR #2463 before we merge this PR, so we have non-finalized state and transaction verifier test coverage. |
jvff
approved these changes
Jul 9, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Motivation
We need to change how
Utxos are created as part of #2231.The deduplicated function will be used in a future PR to check for double-spends.
Priority and Risk
It is easier and less risky to make the changes required for double-spend validation in a single function.
The alternative is making the same changes at 3 separate places in the code, and trying to keep them all in sync.
Solution
new_outputsfunctionAs a side-effect, this change avoids re-calculating some transaction hashes.
This is part of ticket #2231, but it does not close that ticket.
Review
Anyone can review this PR. It's not urgent.
Reviewer Checklist
This function will also be tested as part of the double-spend tests in a future PR.
Follow Up Work
Actually check for double-spends