BIP32/secp256k1/keyPair preparation #915
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
dcousens
changed the title
dcousens
changed the title
dcousens
force-pushed
the
bip32400
branch
4 times, most recently
from
af8b6b0 to
f93a9ef
Compare
|
SGTM for now. |
|
Released as |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As we move towards moving
HDNodetobip32, and supportingsecp256k1, I'm putting this PR up so we can move forward on those API's by liberating the type signature ofTransactionBuilder.prototype.signa little bit.This would simultaneously allow
HDKeyto inter-operate withTransactionBuilder, supportingsecp256k1signing operations near-immediately for those who use that module.And soon-thereafter for our own new
HDNodemodule.toRSBufferandfromRSBufferare conceptually part of #459, for the4.0.0API.That is, with
ECSignatureremoved in4.0.0, we will only interop on "RSBuffer"s, a-kin tosecp256k1, and only need to transcode to a script signature when encoding theTransactionitself.For now, requesting feedback,TODO
AddTransactionBuilder.prototype.signtests for new functionality