Replace justified unwraps in shardtree with expects
#119
Conversation
Rust 1.82 adds support for omitting empty types in pattern matching, which would make these much clearer.
| @@ -406,13 +406,16 @@ impl< | |||
|
|
|||
| /// Adds a checkpoint at the rightmost leaf state of the tree. | |||
| pub fn checkpoint(&mut self, checkpoint_id: C) -> Result<bool, ShardTreeError<S::Error>> { | |||
| /// Pre-condition: `root_addr` must be the address of `root`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This pre-condition (and all similar others in this PR) is verifiably upheld:
- We call this method initially with
go(subtree.root_addr, &subtree.root); it is a programming error for these to be inconsistent. - We recurse by calling either
go(r_addr, right)orgo(l_addr, left)with values obtained fromroot_addrandroot.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it is a programming error for these to be inconsistent.
I note that the public API LocatedTree::from_parts does not enforce that its arguments are consistent; we could potentially strengthen this by making that method fallible and checking that the actual encoded depth of the provided tree matches the provided root address (which would ensure that all parents within the provided tree correspond to a subtree node of the provided root address that can have children).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've updated this PR to add the consistency check to LocatedTree::from_parts.
This ensures that the various existing `unwrap`s are correctly justified.
str4d
force-pushed
the
shardtree-justify-unwraps
branch
from
33e7aa1
to
166872e
Compare
| // the authentication path on the way back up. | ||
| /// Traverse down to the desired leaf position, and then construct | ||
| /// the authentication path on the way back up. | ||
| // |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Non-blocking nit:
| // | |
| /// |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't think that /// comments were allowed on internal documentation? I suspect this whole comment will produce a linting or doc error.
| // the authentication path on the way back up. | ||
| /// Traverse down to the desired leaf position, and then construct | ||
| /// the authentication path on the way back up. | ||
| // |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't think that /// comments were allowed on internal documentation? I suspect this whole comment will produce a linting or doc error.
Part of #118.