Move option to emit struct names to PrettyConfig

[cswinter]

Fixes #200.

[kvark]

Very nice! Also, I believe this is backwards-compatible.
Edit: Actually, no, it's breaking pub fn new(..) API.

[malte-v]

I actually think that this is a bad idea and should be reverted. Emitting struct names is not only a matter of prettiness. Let's say I have two structs, Foo and Bar:

struct Foo { inner: u8 }
struct Bar { inner: u8 }

When serializing a Foo and a Bar with the same inner value, their serialized forms will look the same if struct names are skipped. As a consequence, their cryptographic hashes and signatures will also be the same, so an attacker could take a signed Foo and present it as a signed Bar, even though the two structs may represent totally different information.

Just emitting struct names is programatically (and visually) much nicer than putting all serializeable/signable types into an enum.

[kvark]

Sorry,I don't understand the argument about cryptographic names and hashes.
You want different types to look different in the serialized form? That's already not the case. 1u8 and 1u32 would look exactly the same.

[malte-v]

The fact that 1u8 and 1u32 look the same in serialized form is not a problem because they are semantically the same: They're just integers. Compound types, on the other hand, are often structurally the same but semantically different. That's where emitting struct names comes in handy.

Let me give a more concrete example: you have a kind of decentralized business review platform where each customer has its own keypair and signs reviews:

struct GoodReview(id: BusinessId);
struct BadReview(id: BusinessId);

If you just serialize, hash and sign the above structs without emitting struct names, any valid BadReview will be a valid GoodReview and vice versa. If you emitted struct names, this kind of attack would be impossible.

(In the example above, you'd probably just use an enum instead. But if you have more structs to sign and want absolute peace of mind, you'd have to put all your structs into an enum, which is just a pain to maintain and introduces new kinds of possible errors. Emitting struct names is a much simpler and more elegant solution.)

[malte-v]

Another more general argument is that since this has been merged, your PrettyConfig makes a difference that goes beyond aesthetics: It decides whether you will be able to falsely deserialize into a struct that is structurally the same but not identical to the struct that the value was serialized from.