-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Fix multi-protocol commitments merge-reveal and conceal procedures #129
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've run the failing test 100 times and it always succeeded, so I think we can merge this. Thank you @dr-orlovsky :)
In these days we'll write some more tests to increase chances that everything works good and no more breaking changes will be needed.
The trickiest part were the problems happening when 3+ assets are involved. So I will also be working on increasing test coverage to scenarious above 100 assets. However, right now we can't have 100+ assets in a stable way b/c of #128 (we can't guarantee that all 100+ assets have a unique modulo divider within a scope of powers of two from 1 to 16). |
This is downstream compilation non-breaking part of #127
NB: While it doesn't break compilation downstream, please keep in mind that it still breaks consensus rules, changes APIs (which were not yet used downstream) and invalidates existing stashes and inventories (i.e. stocks).