add tapret tweak only when necessary #158
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
dr-orlovsky
approved these changes
Apr 19, 2024
| let tapret_commitment = output.tapret_commitment()?; | ||
| self.wallet_mut() | ||
| .add_tapret_tweak(terminal, tapret_commitment)?; | ||
| if let (Some(_), _) = fascia.anchor.as_reduced_unsafe().as_split() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is dangerous way to do it - if the split method change signature and will return opret anchor first, this will be missed to be changed. Thus, the better is to
Suggested change
| if let (Some(_), _) = fascia.anchor.as_reduced_unsafe().as_split() { | |
| if let (Some(Anchor::<_, TapretProof> { .. }), _) = fascia.anchor.as_reduced_unsafe().as_split() { |
... but this is too clunky and better I would modify RGB Core API
|
Sorry, reverted since this uses invalid base and everything in RGB Core has already changed |
dr-orlovsky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2024
|
Ok, I did the fix in the right way in ce07eb7 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I've found a bug while doing transfers between an opret wallet (using rgb-lib) and a tapret wallet (using rgb-wallet). In detail I've:
The second transfer will have in input an opret seal and will define 2 seals, one opret (for the receiver) and one tapret (for the RGB change), therefore it will need to create an opret anchor.
This transfer fails (when calling the
paymethod) with the errorCompletion(TapretKey(NoCommitment)).Investigating this, I've noticed that the call to
psbt.dbc_output::<TapretProof>()returns an p2tr output and currently it's used to decide if a tapret tweak needs to be added. But when it tries to extract the tapret commitment from that output (let tapret_commitment = output.tapret_commitment()?;) it fails because it's not there (since the call torgb_commitcreated just an opret commitment). I think the issue is that the call todbc_outputis not enough to decide whether there is a tapret commitment that needs a tapret tweak to be added, in this case for example the method is seeing the p2tr output for the bitcoin change.Therefore with this fix I'm protecting that code with an extra check, inspecting the
AnchorSetof theFasciato see if there's a tapret anchor. As an alternative fix I think thergb_commitmethod could return theCloseMethodSetit used and then protect the addition of the tapret tweak callinghas_tapret_first.