-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
bump elements and related dep #90
Conversation
Ok(Pegin::new(fed_desc, elem_desc)) | ||
// let fed_desc = crate::BtcDescriptor::<Pk>::from_tree(&ms_expr)?; | ||
|
||
// let fed_desc = BtcDescriptor::<Pk>::from_tree(&ms_expr)?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this line fails because variant or associated item cannot be called on Descriptor<Pk> due to unsatisfied trait bounds
and I don't get what I can do about that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the impl_from_tree
macro we have a ton of bounds on Pk
. Upstream these have all been wrapped up into the FromStrKey trait which you need to update the macro to use instead.
If you change this line to call bitcoin_miniscript::expression::FromTree::from_tree
you will get a much better error message from the compiler.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done in e6724fc
just realized we need a simplicity dep bump before this https://github.com/BlockstreamResearch/rust-simplicity I left separated commit for now for easier review, will squash in 1 commit at the end |
92e0972 ci: avoid fail fast in toolchains tests (Riccardo Casatta) c22f9de bump bitcoin dep and related, bump version to 0.3.0 (Riccardo Casatta) Pull request description: Required for ElementsProject/elements-miniscript#90 ACKs for top commit: apoelstra: ACK 92e0972 successfully ran local tests uncomputable: ACK 92e0972 Tree-SHA512: a4ef036136557e5b539a0a52bf46930ebf02e0243603d00c69b98ec3f00e8caf1c0660e00f4c5195fe5ab4ad65b08573970cbf1deee6ae8419d6e818a1aeb33f
3fec3dd
to
e40f8db
Compare
e40f8db
to
003be31
Compare
003be31
to
79f3109
Compare
Sorry for the long delay. There is a clippy issue I'd like you to fix
Not sure why CI is not complaining about this. |
clippy fixed, note that now that I checked I've hit also the following one, not sure if you didn't mention this because we want to allow it or what
|
I don't see that one, but I do see several related to doccomments. I'm not sure what's up. But sounds like we should just do a followup with clippy fixes rather than iterating on this one. Clippy wasn't happy on master either. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 6ed3bbb
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 6ed3bbb
6ed3bbb avoid useless conversion of the same type (Riccardo Casatta) 79f3109 bump elements and related dep (Riccardo Casatta) b6ffda3 ci: let other toolchain finish if one is failing (Riccardo Casatta) 42375e4 bump MSRV 1.58 -> 1.63 (Riccardo Casatta) Pull request description: apoelstra, there are some places where I need guidance Also, I still need to check CI, just tested local `cargo check` and `cargo test` are working for now ACKs for top commit: apoelstra: ACK 6ed3bbb Tree-SHA512: 4d3d5a44c509a0df81527d73ccad1e384c251e28a351b01aae3c19b97b4ce75afa91c6f4cf3b987c7fb8feabfe5abe51fb103a8dfb27493eaa8bf3a74e0b6af4
c5257e2 bump version to 0.4.0 and upgrade changelog (Riccardo Casatta) Pull request description: on top of #90 ACKs for top commit: apoelstra: ACK c5257e2 successfully ran local tests Tree-SHA512: 4d3db3c80232acad1505269ba8272449dcf9b00c6781f62d3bc52ff4c5c2cd23cc1f3b68442b784008f04e846a76f4098b1abc4413088c18b81c7766f4ef4401
apoelstra, there are some places where I need guidance
Also, I still need to check CI, just tested local
cargo check
andcargo test
are working for now