0.0.112 Bindings Branch by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #1810 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning

TheBlueMatt · 2022-10-27T20:16:30Z

This is a rebase of the still-relevant commits from the 0.0.111-bindings branch as well as #1809 backported. This should suffice for 0.0.112 bindings.

+ remove MaybeReadableArgs trait as it is now unused + remove onion_utils::DecodeInput as it would've now needed to be parameterized by the CustomOnionMessageHandler trait, and we'd like to avoid either implementing DecodeInput in messenger or having onion_utils depend on onion_message::* Co-authored-by: Matt Corallo <git@bluematt.me> Co-authored-by: Valentine Wallace <vwallace@protonmail.com>

...as the bindings generation does not currently have the ability to map a reference to a `NodeId` inside a tuple.

.. as the current C bindings generator isn't capable of handling type aliases in generics in type alias definition currently.

Bindings can't handle references in return types, so reduce the visibility to pub(crate).

Currently `Writeable` is mapped manually, making it impossible to automatically map a trait method that is parameterized by `Writeable` (as is true for the `write` method on `KVStore`). Ultimately we'll want to move to automatically mapping `Writeable` like any other trait (only manually mapping the std `Write` and `Read` traits), so this is only a candidate for the bindings branch, not upstream. That may take a few releases, however.

Re-exports in Rust make `use` statements a little shorter, but for otherwise don't materially change a crate's API. Sadly, the C bindings generator currently can't figure out re-exports, but it also exports everything into one global namespace, so it doesn't matter much anyway.

This doesn't change the API expressibility as its currently the only type of message that can be sent, but avoids a generation failure as we can't call `&self` methods on complex enums unless we can `clone` all the inner fields. The correct solution to this is to simply not expose those methods (which sucks, but at least for `OnionMessageContents` they don't really matter), but that doesn't have to come now.

codecov-commenter · 2022-10-27T21:50:26Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 88.46154% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 90.73%. Comparing base (42ab358) to head (83af710).
⚠️ Report is 9 commits behind head on 0.0.112-bindings.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
lightning/src/ln/msgs.rs	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
lightning/src/ln/peer_handler.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## 0.0.112-bindings #1810 +/- ##
====================================================
+ Coverage 90.70% 90.73% +0.03% 
====================================================
Files 87 87 Lines 47364 47363 -1 Branches 47364 47363 -1 ====================================================
+ Hits 42962 42977 +15 + Misses 4402 4386 -16

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

TheBlueMatt · 2022-10-27T20:16:30Z