secp256k1.h: clarify that by default arguments must be != NULL #926
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
|
This seems fine to me, though FWIW, calling any the non-nullable inputs with a statically null input will cause warnings in the caller. And the non-nullable arguments should all be documented as non-nullable with the annotations in the header (though not in doxygen, indeed). |
jonasnick
force-pushed
the
clarify-optional
branch
from
2744e6e to
0881633
Compare
The same file says that the illegal callback will only triger for violations explicitly mentioned, which is not true without this commit because we often don't mention that an argument is not allowed to be NULL.
|
Agreed. Pushed an unrelated (slight) tweak. |
|
ACK 0881633 |
Fabcien
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2024
…_cmp` Summary: Allows comparing `secp256k1_pubkey` and `secp256k1_xonly_pubkey` respectively, to establish an order between them. This is a backport of [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#850 | secp256k1#850 ]] and [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#926 | secp256k1#926 ]]. We need this for porting `rust-secp256k1` to the secp256k1 library of this repo. Test Plan: `ninja check-secp256k1` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D16957
Fabcien
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/secp256k1
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 23, 2024
…_cmp` Summary: Allows comparing `secp256k1_pubkey` and `secp256k1_xonly_pubkey` respectively, to establish an order between them. This is a backport of [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#850 | secp256k1#850 ]] and [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#926 | secp256k1#926 ]]. We need this for porting `rust-secp256k1` to the secp256k1 library of this repo. Test Plan: `ninja check-secp256k1` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D16957
roqqit
pushed a commit
to doged-io/doged
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 20, 2024
…_cmp` Summary: Allows comparing `secp256k1_pubkey` and `secp256k1_xonly_pubkey` respectively, to establish an order between them. This is a backport of [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#850 | secp256k1#850 ]] and [[ bitcoin-core/secp256k1#926 | secp256k1#926 ]]. We need this for porting `rust-secp256k1` to the secp256k1 library of this repo. Test Plan: `ninja check-secp256k1` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D16957
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.
The same file says that the illegal callback will only triger for violations
explicitly mentioned, which is not true without this commit because we often
don't mention that an argument is not allowed to be NULL.
This line is extracted from #783 in the hope that it gets merged faster because other PRs depend on it.