726 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Steve Myers
b14e4ee3a0
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#756: Remove genesis_block lazy initialization
e6f2d029fa9708f98599c1bd4ef74d232b111c5a Remove genesis_block lazy initialization (Shobit Beltangdy)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  This commit contains a change to address issue #752

  cargo test runs successfully.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  Hi, newbie here learning Rust and BDK!  I've removed the lazy_static block in this commit, and when learning about lazy_static also came across something called [once_cell](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cell/struct.OnceCell.html), [soon to be available in stdlib](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74465).  It's like lazy_static but faster and is not a macro.  Shall I keep the lazy_static and create an issue to switch to once_cell in the future, or remove the lazy_static (as I've done) and create an issue anyway?

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  notmandatory:
    ACK e6f2d029fa9708f98599c1bd4ef74d232b111c5a

Tree-SHA512: 528f5fdfb0d7d1f7a83869b7a0de1b25dfcfafae2671c9229cdb4e5d80d11e5578d9325b3d95555e59f5dfb4ed6304c0c112a01a56b6a596e50dd62e310c516e
2022-09-26 17:33:35 -05:00
Shobit Beltangdy
e6f2d029fa
Remove genesis_block lazy initialization
This commit contains a change to address issue #752

cargo test runs successfully.
2022-09-26 10:54:12 -07:00
Alekos Filini
e2bf9734b1
Remove redundant duplicated keys check
This check is redundant since it's already performed by miniscript (see
https://docs.rs/miniscript/7.0.0/miniscript/miniscript/analyzable/enum.AnalysisError.html#variant.RepeatedPubkeys)
and it was incorrectly failing on tr descriptors that contain duplicated
keys across different taproot leaves

Fixes #760
2022-09-24 15:42:42 +02:00
Alekos Filini
c3faf05be9
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#713: Add datatype for is_spent sqlite column
54d768412abf218d2646aba211bb79b9dd287118 Sqlite migrations should either succeed or fail (Vladimir Fomene)
369e17b8012df56587c10cd9ce6651908d6a4be9 Add datatype for is_spent sqlite column (Vladimir Fomene)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  During table creation, Sqlite does not throw an error when a column datatype is not defined. In addition, the datatype provided during table creation does not put a constraint on the type of data that can be put in that column. So you can easily put a string value in an integer column. Despite this, I think it is important for us to add the datatype for clarity.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  You can read more about how Sqlite dynamic typing [here](https://www.sqlite.org/faq.html). I have amended our `migrate` code with a new commit. The idea is to run migrations in a transaction so that they either succeed or fail. This prevents us from having the database in an inconsistent state at any point in time.

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
  * [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  rajarshimaitra:
    tACK 54d768412abf218d2646aba211bb79b9dd287118
  afilini:
    ACK 54d768412abf218d2646aba211bb79b9dd287118

Tree-SHA512: bb6c0467f799ca917f8d45c6495b766352b3177fc81952fcdd678208abf092fdeae966686528a5dcb3f342d7171783274df6312a08cbef3580063e059f5f7254
2022-09-23 12:08:17 +02:00
Alekos Filini
aad5461ee1
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#757: Enable signing taproot transactions with only non_witness_utxos
5e9965fca7fb50708af0d293a9f6cd27d0c85fed Enable signing taproot transactions with only `non_witness_utxos` (Alekos Filini)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  Some wallets may only specify the `non_witness_utxo` for a PSBT input. If that's the case, BDK should still be able to sign.

  This was pointed out in the discussion of #734

  ### Changelog notice

  - Enable signing taproot transactions that only specify the `non_witness_utxo`

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
  * [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  danielabrozzoni:
    tACK 5e9965fca7fb50708af0d293a9f6cd27d0c85fed - the code looks good to me, I played around with the test you provided (inspecting the PSBT, adding/removing the witness and non-witness utxos, etc) and everything works as expected.

Tree-SHA512: 2f205286263bfee4c76de8e8c81ae1349b1c3b255b72045488f8d629c05cab64c6f775307e831674dc036e5a3a760f95d9cdc1beaf48afb4c475aee838131a33
2022-09-23 11:52:20 +02:00
Daniela Brozzoni
0a7a1f4ef2
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#745: Add tests to improve coverage
e65edbf53cb14e273ff99ed0576843dd3367385d Change parameter name of database in test funcs (Vladimir Fomene)
88307045b0f049b7f6b9c0cdc577c4a4bb3a041e Add more test to the database module (Vladimir Fomene)
e06c3f945ca5de4ce4f78bc2179c00e42d0bb4e5 Set tx field to none if `include_raw` is false (Vladimir Fomene)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  This PR add more test to the database module and also fixes certain bugs discovered by the written test. I also amended the name used for the database parameter in the test functions.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  This contributes to fixing #699

  ### Changelog notice

  <!-- Notice the release manager should include in the release tag message changelog -->
  <!-- See https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/ for examples -->

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  rajarshimaitra:
    tACK e65edbf53cb14e273ff99ed0576843dd3367385d
  danielabrozzoni:
    Code review ACK e65edbf53cb14e273ff99ed0576843dd3367385d

Tree-SHA512: 1ac1475f7d63f25e94ef21342e6f6e243c34c8c9208d11a5492f224026055da2a96f20be83497c1ba361effff9861f4e68920f98feebaf4b201d205c7030c282
2022-09-22 13:02:55 +02:00
Alekos Filini
5e9965fca7
Enable signing taproot transactions with only non_witness_utxos
Some wallets may only specify the `non_witness_utxo` for a PSBT input.
If that's the case, BDK should still be able to sign.

This was pointed out in the discussion of #734
2022-09-19 10:54:55 +02:00
Vladimir Fomene
54d768412a
Sqlite migrations should either succeed or fail
The current implementation of the `migrate` method for
Sqlite database does not rollback changes when there is
an error while running one of the migration scripts. This
can leave the database in an inconsistent state. This
change ensures that migrations either succeed completely
or fail.
2022-09-16 19:03:56 +03:00
Elias Rohrer
8963e8c9f4
Improve docs w.r.t. PSBT finalization 2022-09-15 14:45:47 +02:00
Vladimir Fomene
e65edbf53c
Change parameter name of database in test funcs
Change parameter name in database test functions
from `tree` to `db`.
2022-09-13 16:36:31 +03:00
Vladimir Fomene
88307045b0
Add more test to the database module
This PR aims to add more test to database
code so that we can catch bugs as soon
as they occur. Contributing to fixing
issue #699.
2022-09-13 16:35:53 +03:00
Vladimir Fomene
e06c3f945c
Set tx field to none if include_raw is false
`del_tx` pulls the TransactionDetails object using
`select_transaction_details_by_txid` method which gets the transaction
details' data with a non-None transaction field even if the
`include_raw` argument is `false`. So it becomes necessary to Set
the transaction field in transactiondetails to None in `del_tx`, when
we make a call to it with `include_raw=false`.
2022-09-13 11:08:03 +03:00
Steve Myers
ab41679368
Add fee_amount() and fee_rate() functions to PsbtUtils trait
PsbtUtils.fee_amount(), calculates the PSBT total transaction fee amount in Sats.
PsbtUtils.fee_rate(), calculates the PSBT FeeRate, the value is only accurate AFTER the PSBT is finalized.
2022-09-12 22:01:18 -05:00
Alekos Filini
13cf72ffa7
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#738: Fix docs.rs features
3451d1c12e4271b6067ff246d095eb9fb1ca3bd5 Fix docs.rs features (Alekos Filini)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  Fix docs.rs features

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### New Features:

  * [ ] I've added tests for the new feature
  * [ ] I've added docs for the new feature
  * [ ] I've updated `CHANGELOG.md`

ACKs for top commit:
  danielabrozzoni:
    utACK 3451d1c12e4271b6067ff246d095eb9fb1ca3bd5
  notmandatory:
    ACK 3451d1c12e4271b6067ff246d095eb9fb1ca3bd5

Tree-SHA512: 96dc4f816b21cf20fc2828dcfd56865f3f9add8e4aa643205879c810d09e6f2e73d6643061bf3ca98145b37e726907dedd31a145f92d6646c172a43ae2285aa8
2022-08-31 15:57:48 +02:00
Steve Myers
3d69f1c291
Update DEVELOPMENT_CYCLE.md to work with [patch.crates-io] 2022-08-31 07:43:03 -05:00
Alekos Filini
3451d1c12e
Fix docs.rs features 2022-08-31 11:23:51 +02:00
Liam
bfd7b2f65d
Allow creating transactions with dust outputs
Add TxBuilder::allow_dust() that skips checking the dust limit
2022-08-30 11:25:34 -04:00
Alekos Filini
061f15af00
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#682: Add a custom signer for hardware wallets
138acc3b7d137788d0518182e2167504e58ebc48 Change `populate_test_db` to not return empty input (wszdexdrf)
d6e1dd104063075f49b617786d82d29c1f9c6a0a Change CI to add test using ledger emulator (wszdexdrf)
76034772cba4d3d6fa1bdcb08977c2b9d7a157c2 Add a custom signer for hardware wallets (wszdexdrf)

Pull request description:

  Also adds a new test in CI for building and testing on a virtual
  hardware wallet.

  ### Description

  This PR would enable BDK users to sign transactions using a hardware wallet. It is just the beginning hence there are no complex features, but I hope not for long.
  I have added a test in CI for building a ledger emulator and running the new test on it. The test is similar to the one on bitcoindevkit/rust-hwi.

  ### Notes to the reviewers
  The PR is incomplete (and wouldn't work, as the rust-hwi in `cargo.toml` is pointing to a local crate, temporarily) as a small change is required in rust-hwi (https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/rust-hwi/pull/42).

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### New Features:

  * [x] I've added tests for the new feature
  * [x] I've added docs for the new feature
  * [x] I've updated `CHANGELOG.md`

ACKs for top commit:
  afilini:
    ACK 138acc3b7d137788d0518182e2167504e58ebc48

Tree-SHA512: 54337f06247829242b4dc60f733346173d957de8e9f8b80beb91304d679cfb4e0e4db722c967469265a5b6ede2bd641ba5c089760391c671995dc30de37897de
2022-08-29 16:15:02 +02:00
Vladimir Fomene
369e17b801
Add datatype for is_spent sqlite column
Although, Sqlite column accepts
values of any type, it is
important to annotate this column
to make it easy to reason about.
2022-08-29 13:35:33 +03:00
Alekos Filini
2bff4e5e56
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#726: [bug-fix] Set the db sync height
08668ac46247d527cc53af5b6f359b1fa4e3b6aa Set the db sync height (rajarshimaitra)

Pull request description:

  <!-- You can erase any parts of this template not applicable to your Pull Request. -->

  ### Description

  Fixes #719

  Previously we weren't setting the db sync height in populate_test_db
  macro even when current height is provided.. This creates a bug that
  get_funded_wallet will return 0 balance.

  This PR fixes the populate_test_db macro and updates tests which were
  previously dependent on the unsynced wallet behavior.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  <!-- In this section you can include notes directed to the reviewers, like explaining why some parts
  of the PR were done in a specific way -->

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  afilini:
    ACK 08668ac46247d527cc53af5b6f359b1fa4e3b6aa

Tree-SHA512: 1dcc968e4b3551e916b450c5ff2fab6636083f104cc982eb3f7602c624382434e0170d9f0c0a356e6c9c5f834eebe5cb1365b37ef73d7b4ef15d652a364dc2ab
2022-08-29 10:24:40 +02:00
wszdexdrf
138acc3b7d
Change populate_test_db to not return empty input 2022-08-29 13:54:01 +05:30
wszdexdrf
76034772cb
Add a custom signer for hardware wallets
Also add function to get funded wallet with coinbase
2022-08-29 13:53:56 +05:30
Vladimir Fomene
de358f8cdc
Implement conversion for Lightning fee rate
Lightning denotes transaction fee rate
sats / 1000 weight units and sats / 1000 vbytes.
Here we add support for creating BDK fee rate from
lightning fee rate. We also move all FeeRate test to
types.rs and rename as_sat_vb to as_sat_per_vb.
2022-08-28 21:37:07 +03:00
rajarshimaitra
08668ac462
Set the db sync height
Previously we weren't setting the db sync height in populate_test_db
macro even when current height is provided.. This creates a bug that
get_funded_wallet will return 0 balance.

This PR fixes the populate_test_db macro and updates tests which were
previously dependent on the unsynced wallet behavior.
2022-08-28 23:51:24 +05:30
Alekos Filini
0a3734ed2b
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#718: Verify signatures after signing
7b1ad1b62914a26d6f445364ace4e784bb2901c2 Verify signatures after signing (Scott Robinson)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  Verify signatures after signing

  As per [BIP-340, footnote 14][fn]:
  > Verifying the signature before leaving the signer prevents random or
  > attacker provoked computation errors. This prevents publishing invalid
  > signatures which may leak information about the secret key. It is
  > recommended, but can be omitted if the computation cost is prohibitive.

  [fn]: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0340.mediawiki#cite_note-14

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  How do we test this?

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [ ] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  afilini:
    re-ACK 7b1ad1b62914a26d6f445364ace4e784bb2901c2

Tree-SHA512: 7319db1f8cec2fcfe4ac443ab5728893f9fb6133b33331b35ec6910662c45de8a7cdcf80ac1f3bb435815e914ccf639682a5c07ff0baef42605bf044a34a8232
2022-08-25 12:21:40 +02:00
Alekos Filini
a5d1a3d65c
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#722: Implement Deref<Target=UrlClient> for EsploraBlockchain
baf7eaace66edcae8bf3252a962b9417b704ba26 Implement Deref<Target=UrlClient> for EsploraBlockchain (Vladimir Fomene)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  There is currently no way to access the client from the EsploraBlockchain. This makes it difficult for users to extend it's functionality. This PR exposes both the reqwest and ureq clients. This PR is related to PR #705.

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  rajarshimaitra:
    tACK baf7eaace66edcae8bf3252a962b9417b704ba26

Tree-SHA512: e2f530058c88e06fc2972edfcd2df1b534d43b0214d710b62e4d5200ac0e38dad6a9f8db1e0c7a7ed19892e59411dcc07f3f6dc8ad58afae9d677169ca98bb38
2022-08-25 12:20:12 +02:00
Alekos Filini
7bc2980905
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#705: Implement Deref<Target=Client> for ElectrumBlockchain
c5952dd09a61b1cd2185c273e0b8bcb3fd6ed2dd Implement `Deref<Target=Client>` for `ElectrumBlockchain` (Alekos Filini)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  As pointed out in https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/rust-electrum-client/pull/58#issuecomment-1207890096 there was no way to keep using the client once it was given to BDK.

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  rajarshimaitra:
    ACK c5952dd09a61b1cd2185c273e0b8bcb3fd6ed2dd

Tree-SHA512: fbfbada51c9426266c8960da5508ee07b196808f0d670a09a51962bd6eda9ccf585e209f5b99b5ab78a3d17af774bdb3e33ef36ac4f4d1ce7f2c3398ae4f6d0c
2022-08-25 12:19:21 +02:00
Scott Robinson
7b1ad1b629
Verify signatures after signing
As per [BIP-340, footnote 14][fn]:
> Verifying the signature before leaving the signer prevents random or
> attacker provoked computation errors. This prevents publishing invalid
> signatures which may leak information about the secret key. It is
> recommended, but can be omitted if the computation cost is prohibitive.

[fn]: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0340.mediawiki#cite_note-14
2022-08-25 16:29:44 +10:00
rajarshimaitra
a8f9f6c43a
RpcBlockchain derefs to the underlying RPC Client 2022-08-23 21:44:38 +05:30
Alekos Filini
c9b1b6d076
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#723: Fix P2WPKH_SATISFACTION_SIZE in CS tests
cd078903a7108f86fdd9557b206f25c9611d07d3 Fix P2WPKH_SATISFACTION_SIZE in CS tests (Daniela Brozzoni)

Pull request description:

  Our costant for the P2WPKH satisfaction size was wrong: in
  7ac87b8f99fc0897753ce57d48ea24adf495a633 we added 1 WU for the script
  sig len - but actually, that's 4WU! This resulted in
  P2WPKH_SATISFACTION_SIZE being equal to 109 instead of 112.
  This also adds a comment for better readability.

  ### Description

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### New Features:

  * [ ] I've added tests for the new feature
  * [ ] I've added docs for the new feature
  * [ ] I've updated `CHANGELOG.md`

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
  * [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  csralvall:
    utACK cd078903a7108f86fdd9557b206f25c9611d07d3
  afilini:
    ACK cd078903a7108f86fdd9557b206f25c9611d07d3

Tree-SHA512: 3e39735505e411392cf01885b5920443d23fa21d9c20cc7c8fdeaa2698df8bc2da86241b6c20f5e3f5941fe1a0aebe8f957d8145d4f9e7ad3f213e4658d6ea68
2022-08-17 13:46:48 +02:00
Daniela Brozzoni
cd078903a7
Fix P2WPKH_SATISFACTION_SIZE in CS tests
Our costant for the P2WPKH satisfaction size was wrong: in
7ac87b8f99fc0897753ce57d48ea24adf495a633 we added 1 WU for the script
sig len - but actually, that's 4WU! This resulted in
P2WPKH_SATISFACTION_SIZE being equal to 109 instead of 112.
This also adds a comment for better readability.
2022-08-16 18:27:59 +01:00
Vladimir Fomene
baf7eaace6
Implement Deref<Target=UrlClient> for EsploraBlockchain
There is currently no way to access the client
from the EsploraBlockchain. This makes it difficult
for users to extend it's functionality. This PR exposes
both the reqwest and ureq clients. This PR is related to
PR #705.
2022-08-15 19:34:57 +03:00
Alekos Filini
e2bd96012a
Bump version to 0.21.0 2022-08-11 17:02:32 +02:00
Alekos Filini
9be63e66ec
Merge commit 'refs/pull/703/head' of github.com:bitcoindevkit/bdk into release/0.21.0 2022-08-09 12:06:13 +02:00
Alekos Filini
9f9ffd0efd
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#703: Fix minor typos in docs
134b19a9cb127989402fe331f48a1e37eb3cdcad Fix minor typos in docs (thunderbiscuit)

Pull request description:

  ### Description
  This PR fixes:
  1. The use of "i.e." in docs, sometimes spelled as "ie."
  2. A small typo in the sentence "Note that this methods only operate on the internal database..."
  3. A small typo in the sentence "Finish the building the transaction"

  I came across these while building docs for bdk-kotlin.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  danielabrozzoni:
    ACK 134b19a9cb127989402fe331f48a1e37eb3cdcad

Tree-SHA512: 67296999eba8ffe1fe64756fa023d85064774cb9d4c26e99054d467b5024baea4138f11d602d04e695412c61625ee4f5b4687b75f177cfec2604a6c61a5a6216
2022-08-09 12:05:35 +02:00
Alekos Filini
2db881519a
Merge branch 'release/0.21.0', commit 'refs/pull/704/head' of github.com:bitcoindevkit/bdk into release/0.21.0 2022-08-09 11:54:23 +02:00
Alekos Filini
d9adfbe047
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#704: Fix rpc::CoreTxIter logic.
74e2c477f124489a2357921ca879cc82e24da5fd Replace `rpc::CoreTxIter` with `list_transactions` fn. (志宇)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  This fixes a bug where `CoreTxIter` attempts to call `listtransactions` immediately after a tx result is filtered (instead of being returned), when in fact, the correct logic will be to pop another tx result.

  The new logic also ensures that tx results are returned in chonological order. The test `test_list_transactions` verifies this. We also now ensure that `page_size` is between the range `[0 to 1000]` otherwise an error is returned.

  Some needless cloning is removed from `from_config` as well as logging improvements.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  This is an oversight by me (sorry) for PR #683

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  ~* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API~
  * [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  afilini:
    ACK 74e2c477f124489a2357921ca879cc82e24da5fd

Tree-SHA512: f32314a9947067673d19d95da8cde36b350c0bb0ebe0924405ad50602c14590f7ccb09a3e03cdfdd227f938dccd0f556f3a2b4dd7fdd6eba1591c0f8d3e65182
2022-08-09 11:49:56 +02:00
志宇
74e2c477f1
Replace rpc::CoreTxIter with list_transactions fn.
This fixes a bug where `CoreTxIter` attempts to call `listtransactions`
immediately after a tx result is filtered (instead of being returned),
when in fact, the correct logic will be to pop another tx result.

The new logic also ensures that tx results are returned in chonological
order. The test `test_list_transactions` verifies this. We also now
ensure that `page_size` is between the range `[0 to 1000]` otherwise an
error is returned.

Some needless cloning is removed from `from_config` as well as logging
improvements.
2022-08-08 21:12:23 +08:00
Alekos Filini
c5952dd09a
Implement Deref<Target=Client> for ElectrumBlockchain
As pointed out in https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/rust-electrum-client/pull/58#issuecomment-1207890096
there was no way to keep using the client once it was given to BDK.
2022-08-08 12:03:35 +02:00
thunderbiscuit
134b19a9cb
Fix minor typos in docs 2022-08-05 12:45:18 -04:00
wszdexdrf
0f03831274
Change get_balance to return in categories.
Add type balance with add, display traits. Change affected tests.
Update `CHANGELOG.md`
2022-08-04 10:37:09 +02:00
志宇
5eeba6cced
Various RpcBlockchain improvements
These are as suggested by @danielabrozzoni and @afilini

Also introduced `RpcSyncParams::force_start_time` for users who
prioritise reliability above all else.

Also improved logging.
2022-08-04 11:29:38 +08:00
志宇
5eb74af414
Rpc: Manually add immature coinbase utxos
Before this commit, the rpc backend would not notice immature utxos
(`listunspent` does not return them), making the rpc balance different
to other blockchain implementations.

Co-authored-by: Daniela Brozzoni <danielabrozzoni@protonmail.com>
2022-08-04 11:27:50 +08:00
志宇
ac19c19f21
New RpcBlockchain implementation with various fixes
The new implementation fixes the following:
* We can track more than 100 scriptPubKeys
* We can obtain more than 1000 transactions per sync
* `TransactionDetails` for already-synced transactions are updated when
  new scriptPubKeys are introduced (fixing the missing balance/coins
      issue of supposedly tracked scriptPubKeys)

`RpcConfig` changes:
* Introduce `RpcSyncParams`.
* Remove `RpcConfig::skip_blocks` (this is replaced by
  `RpcSyncParams::start_time`).
2022-08-04 11:27:37 +08:00
Daniela Brozzoni
ef03da0a76
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#693: Fix the early InsufficientFunds error in the branch and bound
9d85c9667f7d12902afef3ba08ea7231f6868a78 Fix the early InsufficientFunds error in the branch and bound (Alekos Filini)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  We were wrongly considering the sum of "effective value" (i.e. value -
  fee cost) when reporting an early "insufficient funds" error in the
  branch and bound coin selection.

  This commit fixes essentially two issues:
  - Very high fee rates could cause a panic during the i64 -> u64
    conversion because we assumed the sum of effective values would never
    be negative
  - Since we were comparing the sum of effective values of *all* the UTXOs
    (even the optional UTXOs with negative effective value) with the target
    we'd like to reach, we could in some cases error and tell the user we
    don't have enough funds, while in fact we do! Since we are not required
    to spend any of the optional UTXOs, so we could just ignore the ones
    that *cost us* money to spend and excluding them could potentially
    allow us to reach the target.

  There's a third issue that was present before and remains even with this
  fix: when we report the "available" funds in the error, we are ignoring
  UTXOs with negative effective value, so it may look like there are less
  funds in the wallet than there actually are.

  I don't know how to convey the right message the user: if we actually
  consider them we just make the "needed" value larger and larger (which
  may be confusing, because if the user asks BDK to send 10k satoshis, why
  do we say that we actually need 100k?), while if we don't we could report
  an incorrect "available" value.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  I'm opening this as a draft before adding tests because I want to gather some feedback on the available vs needed error reporting. I personally think reporting a reasonable "needed" value is more important than the "available", because in a wallet app I would expect this is the value that would be shown to the user.

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
  * [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  danielabrozzoni:
    utACK 9d85c9667f7d12902afef3ba08ea7231f6868a78

Tree-SHA512: 9a06758cba61ade73198f35b08070987d5eb065e01750ce62409f86b37cd0b0894640e9f75c8b2c26543c0da04e3f77bd397fab540e789f221661aae828db224
2022-08-03 20:04:28 +02:00
Alekos Filini
9d85c9667f
Fix the early InsufficientFunds error in the branch and bound
We were wrongly considering the sum of "effective value" (i.e. value -
fee cost) when reporting an early "insufficient funds" error in the
branch and bound coin selection.

This commit fixes essentially two issues:
- Very high fee rates could cause a panic during the i64 -> u64
  conversion because we assumed the sum of effective values would never
  be negative
- Since we were comparing the sum of effective values of *all* the UTXOs
  (even the optional UTXOs with negative effective value) with the target
  we'd like to reach, we could in some cases error and tell the user we
  don't have enough funds, while in fact we do! Since we are not required
  to spend any of the optional UTXOs, so we could just ignore the ones
  that *cost us* money to spend and excluding them could potentially
  allow us to reach the target.

There's a third issue that was present before and remains even with this
fix: when we report the "available" funds in the error, we are ignoring
UTXOs with negative effective value, so it may look like there are less
funds in the wallet than there actually are.

I don't know how to convey the right message the user: if we actually
consider them we just make the "needed" value larger and larger (which
may be confusing, because if the user asks BDK to send 10k satoshis, why
do we say that we actually need 100k?), while if we don't we could report
an incorrect "available" value.
2022-08-03 19:15:06 +02:00
Daniela Brozzoni
85bd126c6c
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#686: doc: Document that list_transactions() might return unsorted txs
7fdacdbad40f4e9f6726b064d8eb4d93789e9990 doc: Document that list_transactions() might return unsorted txs, show how to sort them if needed (w0xlt)

Pull request description:

  This PR documents that `list_transactions()` might return unsorted transaction and shows how to sort them if needed.

  Closes #518.

ACKs for top commit:
  danielabrozzoni:
    re-ACK 7fdacdbad40f4e9f6726b064d8eb4d93789e9990

Tree-SHA512: 83bec98e1903d6dc6b8933e8994cb9d04aad059cee8a7b8e1e3a322cf52511364b36d0cd6be1c8cb1fd82c67f8be5a262bbd2c76e30b24eb4097c30f38aa8b10
2022-08-03 17:17:36 +02:00
w0xlt
7fdacdbad4
doc: Document that list_transactions() might return unsorted txs, show how to sort them if needed 2022-08-03 12:08:50 -03:00
Cesar Alvarez Vallero
e8df3d2d91
Consolidate fee_amount and amount_needed
Before this commit `fee_amount` and `amount_needed` were passed as independent
parameters. From the perspective of coin selection algorithms, they are always
used jointly for the same purpose, to create a coin selection with a total
effective value greater than it's summed values.

This commit removes the abstraction that the use of the two parameter
introduced by consolidating both into a single parameter, `target_amount`, who
carries their values added up.
2022-08-03 12:19:01 +02:00
Alekos Filini
1730e0150f
Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#666: Various fixes to the fee_amount calculation in create_tx
419dc248b667db05295cd4c68347c4ef51f51023 test: Document `test_bump_fee_add_input_change_dust` (Daniela Brozzoni)
632dabaa07ef9c58926facf0af5190f62bb65d12 test: Check tx feerate with longer signatures (Daniela Brozzoni)
2756411ef7cf0415baf2f2401e2d5a78481d0aa1 test: Reproduce #660 conditions (Daniela Brozzoni)
50af51da5a5c906d8bf660d35a4f922ceb996068 test: Fix P2WPKH_FAKE_WITNESS_SIZE (Daniela Brozzoni)
ae919061e2b341ae74c90f0133ba392e835cb4e1 Take into account the segwit tx header when... ...selecting coins (Daniela Brozzoni)
7ac87b8f99fc0897753ce57d48ea24adf495a633 TXIN_BASE_WEIGHT shouldn't include the script len (Daniela Brozzoni)
ac051d7ae9512883e11a89ab002ad2d2c3c55c19 Calculate fee amount after output addition (Daniela Brozzoni)
00d426b88546a346820c102386cd1bfff82ca8f6 test: Check that the feerate is never below... ...the requested one in assert_fee_rate (Daniela Brozzoni)
42fde6d4575b4aea121286f884f712b1c1cf64be test: Check fee_amount in assert_fee_rate (Daniela Brozzoni)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  This PR mainly fixes two bugs:
  1. TXIN_BASE_WEIGHT wrongly included the `script_len` (Fixes #160)
  2. We wouldn't take into account the segwit header in the fee calculation, which could have resulted in a transaction with a lower feerate than the requested one
  3. In tests we used to push 108 bytes on the witness as a fake signature, but we should have pushed 106 instead

  I also add a test to reproduce the conditions of #660, to check if it's solved. Turns out it's been solved already in #630, but if you're curious about what the bug was, here it is: https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/issues/660#issuecomment-1196436776
  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

  #### Bugfixes:

  * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
  * [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
  * [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

ACKs for top commit:
  afilini:
    ACK 419dc248b667db05295cd4c68347c4ef51f51023

Tree-SHA512: c7b55342eac440a3607a16b94560cb9c08c4805c853432adfda8e21c5177f85d5a8afe0e7e61140e92c8f10934332459c6234fc5f1509ea699d97b1d04f030c6
2022-08-03 11:40:36 +02:00