Conversation
oleonardolima
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ACK 214fa09
I'm just wondering if we should add a new dependency, but I don't see much problem as it's only on the example-crates
But then it adds extra compile time and further surface for conflicts and other errors in all CI tests and Clippy checks... That's the overhead that I referred to. |
We could use |
ValuedMammal
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left a few comments. Additionally we should fix printing balances for wallet_rpc like you have in 96c0129, but besides that I think the rpc example is mostly fine. Also, what do you think about switching the examples to use Signet?
|
We might need to revisit this after #1128 was merged. Since we are using the |
c2802fe to
982756f
Compare
Done! We are using Ready for a new quick round of reviews @ValuedMammal and @oleonardolima |
ValuedMammal
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ACK 982756f
This is beautiful. I'm wondering if we should change the faucet address to one that we know will be able to recycle the sats, probably doesn't need to be done now though, and to be honest I usually don't broadcast when running the example code anyway.
That's a good point, maybe we could use one that's been used by @thunderbiscuit for the tests on the CI ? 🤔 |
0e8124e to
3a0a1e2
Compare
|
rebased |
|
FYI I'm in the process of securing signet satoshis for the foundation. Once I have them I'll let everyone know in the chat and I can send the to whatever wallets we need. |
bd8daef to
1c9d131
Compare
|
Thanks @ValuedMammal. I've incorporated all of your suggestions, rebased and squashed everything into a single |
oleonardolima
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
tACK
besides the minor comment about the wallet_rpc README, it looks good to me.
1c9d131 to
3d08c0d
Compare
|
Just to recap I think there's a few things missing. Not sure if maybe something went wrong during a rebase. If we can fix these then I'd like to merge it soon to avoid more review churn.
|
00a7d32 to
0f4ab48
Compare
@ValuedMammal Thank you so much for going through this. |
|
self-ACK 31f8b95 @notmandatory This looks good to me |
31f8b95 to
e282641
Compare
|
rebased |
- Print balances only in BTC - Uses Signet instead of Testnet - Fix wallet_esplora_async printing the KeychainKind twice, and forgets to print spk0 - Change wallet examples to use mempool.space (Electrum) or BDK's signet (Esplora) to fix rate limiting issues, along with more conservative PARALLEL_REQUESTS - Standardize code for wallet_esplora_* - Uses the new BDK rustsqlite (in-memory) instead of BDK's file store. - Electrum: use the new populate_tx_cache method Co-authored-by: ValuedMammal <valuedmammal@protonmail.com>
e282641 to
dbd4f44
Compare
ValuedMammal
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seeing that #1514 made significant improvements to the wallet examples, my feeling on this PR as of now is that most of the changes can be dropped except to fix these
- remove "sats" from displayed balance
- swap faucet address for BDK's address
- electrum: fix inspect-spks
|
Remember to include the "rusqlite" feature in Cargo.toml for any example crates that use it |
|
@storopoli we can close this one now right? |
Description
Fix wallet examples.
Closes #1434
Notes to the reviewers
wallet_esplora_asyncprinting theKeychainKindtwice, and forgets to printspk0PARALLEL_REQUESTSwallet_esplora_*Changelog notice
Checklists
All Submissions:
cargo fmtandcargo clippybefore committingNew Features:
Bugfixes: