Assorted 0.0.116 Bindings updates #2430
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
The C bindings generation currently has issues looking through a generic associated type. While this should be fixed in the bindings generator, its easy to fix here for now and we can revisit it later.
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2023-07-116-bindings-part-1
branch
from
297aa01 to
7ed4810
Compare
wpaulino
reviewed
Jul 18, 2023
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2023-07-116-bindings-part-1
branch
from
7ed4810 to
eca9c6c
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2430 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 90.32% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 106 106
Lines 55664 55977 +313
Branches 55664 55977 +313
==========================================
+ Hits 50254 50564 +310
- Misses 5410 5413 +3
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
LGTM but there's one more build error in |
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2023-07-116-bindings-part-1
branch
from
eca9c6c to
440f6f2
Compare
|
Oops, sorry, fixed fuzz build. |
wpaulino
previously approved these changes
Jul 19, 2023
jkczyz
reviewed
Jul 20, 2023
In bindings we can't practically pass a mutable transaction, and instead need to pass an owned transaction and have the sign method return a signed copy. We do this here for all build modes as the API is roughly equivalent also to Rust users.
We already hold them in a vec, so there's no cost to passing them by ownership vs making it a slice. Further, this helps bindings as we can't represent slices to non-pointers in a sensible way.
Given we build `InFlightHtlcs` per route-fetch call, there's no reason to pass them out by reference rather than simply giving the user the full object. This also allows them to tweak the in-flight set before fetching a route.
This code was always effectively dead - we have a special `MultiThreadedLockableScore` type which wraps a `Mutex` for bindings users, so there's no need to implement any bindings-specific scoring logic for them.
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2023-07-116-bindings-part-1
branch
from
440f6f2 to
35dda4e
Compare
wpaulino
approved these changes
Jul 20, 2023
jkczyz
approved these changes
Jul 20, 2023
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.
Probably a few more to come, but here's the first batch.