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

Macro with same name in rust-bitcoin is quite different #696

Open
tcharding opened this issue May 12, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Macro with same name in rust-bitcoin is quite different #696

tcharding opened this issue May 12, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@tcharding
Copy link
Member

In rust-bitcoin we have a macro name the same as one here impl_array_newtype but they differ substantially.

Should they be the same?

The one in rust-bitcoin was patched in rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#2585

@apoelstra
Copy link
Member

Yeah, these should be the same.

It's tempting to move the macro into internals but right now hashes does not have an internals dep. So maybe ok to continue having the macro be copy/pasted. But maybe we should have a lint check to verify that the code is identical?

@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

tcharding commented May 13, 2024

The macro is in internals, and I just realized there are two of them in secp, one in each crate.

Oh, did you mean secp256k1 doesn't have a dependency on internals?

@apoelstra
Copy link
Member

Oh, yeah, I was confusing hashes (which has yet another macro that serves a similar purpose..) with secp256k1.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants