Support Segwit addresses in orderbooks #1064
Conversation
|
@shamardy I've pushed the fixes, please review again 🙂 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did not understand all the notions of Rust that I saw in the pull request, but what I understood and read seems correct to me!
One small question regarding: https://github.com/KomodoPlatform/atomicDEX-API/pull/1064/files#diff-419a1934bf5c18ab0befab6e49dbf0d084e992cce06aba1b033ddef608889101R22
In general, for such constants, do we want to have a commonplace to facilitate the writing of unit tests?
I see, for example, that in https://github.com/KomodoPlatform/atomicDEX-API/pull/1064/files#diff-6d3ec491778e38704498865bb58b487ca0abfe56dd4bf794c6579c5fdadda313R8058 we use the same content.
@Milerius Yes, it can be useful in the future. But it will take a bit more time to refactor, which is out of this task context. I did it because I had few tests failing due to the unavailability of some electrums - they used only one or two servers. |
#826
Also related to #1046. It's the second try to implement a backward-compatible way of displaying segwit addresses in the order books 🙂
Thanks to @shamardy and @sergeyboyko0791 for brainstorming on this matter!