zcash_client_backend: Implement note management via change splitting. #1579
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1579 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 55.93% 56.40% +0.46%
==========================================
Files 149 149
Lines 18728 19078 +350
==========================================
+ Hits 10476 10760 +284
- Misses 8252 8318 +66 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
from
6387785
to
e426b68
Compare
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
6 times, most recently
from
36a54aa
to
e6c1fa3
Compare
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
from
e6c1fa3
to
6c95fd8
Compare
|
force-pushed to fix the name of |
| let mut found_tx_change_memo = false; | ||
| let mut found_tx_empty_memo = false; | ||
| T::with_decrypted_pool_memos(&d_tx, |memo| { | ||
| if Memo::try_from(memo).unwrap() == change_memo { | ||
| found_tx_change_memo = true | ||
| } | ||
| if Memo::try_from(memo).unwrap() == Memo::Empty { | ||
| found_tx_empty_memo = true | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| assert!(found_tx_change_memo); | ||
| assert!(found_tx_empty_memo); | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify that the stored sent notes match what we're expecting | ||
| let sent_note_ids = st | ||
| .wallet() | ||
| .get_sent_note_ids(&sent_tx_id, T::SHIELDED_PROTOCOL) | ||
| .unwrap(); | ||
| assert_eq!(sent_note_ids.len(), 3); | ||
|
|
||
| // The sent memo should be the empty memo for the sent output, and the | ||
| // change output's memo should be as specified. | ||
| let mut change_memo_count = 0; | ||
| let mut found_sent_empty_memo = false; | ||
| for sent_note_id in sent_note_ids { | ||
| match st | ||
| .wallet() | ||
| .get_memo(sent_note_id) | ||
| .expect("Note id is valid") | ||
| .as_ref() | ||
| { | ||
| Some(m) if m == &change_memo => { | ||
| change_memo_count += 1; | ||
| } | ||
| Some(m) if m == &Memo::Empty => { | ||
| found_sent_empty_memo = true; | ||
| } | ||
| Some(other) => panic!("Unexpected memo value: {:?}", other), | ||
| None => panic!("Memo should not be stored as NULL"), | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| assert_eq!(change_memo_count, 2); | ||
| assert!(found_sent_empty_memo); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think nothing here checks that it is specifically the sent note (that is, the one with value 100_0000 zatoshis sent to the to address) that has the empty memo.
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
5 times, most recently
from
eb28bfd
to
5afea2e
Compare
|
force-pushed to address comments from code review. Then, force-pushed to rebase on |
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
from
5afea2e
to
4059a29
Compare
|
force-pushed to address additional comments from my pairing with @daira. |
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| // If we don't have as many change outputs as we expected, recompute the fee. | ||
| let (fee_with_change, excess_fee) = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[non-blocking] This section of the code from L. 450 to L. 526 is pretty hard to read and follow (even with the generous comments). I wonder if there's a way to reduce its complexity in terms of lamdas and if-else statements so not only is more friendly to follow and maintain, but also to test.
… instead of a tuple.
…allet metadata. In the process this modifies input selection to take the change strategy as an explicit argument, rather than being wrapped as part of the input selector.
Co-authored-by: Jack Grigg <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Daira-Emma Hopwood <[email protected]>
nuttycom
force-pushed
the
wallet/multi_output_change_strategy
branch
from
4059a29
to
47b1065
Compare
|
force-pushed to rebase on |
| } else { | ||
| Ok(0) | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| // Once we calculate the balance with and without change, there are five cases: | ||
| // |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"change output is added" -> "change output(s) are added" on line 337.
Also on line 345, it's unclear how many change outputs will be added in that case, so the comment should be clarified (there only needs to be one for the purpose of including a change memo, but that doesn't necessarily preserve indistinguishability).
Co-authored-by: Daira-Emma Hopwood <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daira-Emma Hopwood <[email protected]>
str4d
added
the
C-tracked-feature
str4d
removed
the
C-tracked-feature
Best reviewed commit-by-commit, hiding whitespace changes.
Part of #1355.