Skip to content
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

Refine JoinSplit ephemeral keys to be x25519_dalek::PublicKeys #313

Closed
dconnolly opened this issue Mar 19, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #354
Closed

Refine JoinSplit ephemeral keys to be x25519_dalek::PublicKeys #313

dconnolly opened this issue Mar 19, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #354
Assignees
Labels
A-dependencies Area: Dependency file updates

Comments

@dconnolly
Copy link
Contributor

We're pulling in dalek elsewhere for these types too.

@dconnolly
Copy link
Contributor Author

x25519_dalek::PublicKey does not impl PartialEq or Eq...

@hdevalence
Copy link
Contributor

Do we need to have PartialEq for JoinSplitDescriptions? My sense is that in general use, it's not necessary to ever check equality, and if we need to check equality when doing property tests we could serialize as needed rather than carrying extra impls around. At the highest level, someone might want to check equality of transactions, but we could special-case that by using transaction hashes.

dconnolly added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 13, 2020
Impls PartialEq and Eq and Arbitrary on JoinSplit because PublicKey
does not impl them and we can't do it directly.

Resolves #313
dconnolly added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 13, 2020
Impls PartialEq and Eq and Arbitrary on JoinSplit because PublicKey
does not impl them and we can't do it directly.

Resolves #313
skyl added a commit to skyl/zebra that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2024
daphne isn't it really - but we have the websockets ..
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-dependencies Area: Dependency file updates
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants