--- Day changed Thu Aug 27 2020
00:16 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
00:47 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.12.232] has joined ##miniscript     
00:49 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.12.232] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
00:53 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.12.232] has joined ##miniscript     
01:43 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@2601:645:c200:f539:c134:ae7f:2da9:d893] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
02:43 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.12.232] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
03:41 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined ##miniscript     
04:51 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.7.5 - https://znc.in]     
04:52 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has joined ##miniscript     
06:42 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
06:44 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has joined ##miniscript     
07:16 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
07:19 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined ##miniscript     
09:58 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@2601:645:c200:f539:10b:1840:c70a:412a] has joined ##miniscript     
10:35 -!- afilini_ [~user@gateway/tor-sasl/afilini] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.8]     
10:49 -!- afilini [~user@gateway/tor-sasl/afilini] has joined ##miniscript     
10:50 < sanket1729> andytoshi: Do you think trivial should not normalize then? I guess more of an API question. Is or(true, pk()) trivial or not?
11:12 < andytoshi> sanket1729: i think it should not normalize, correct
11:12 < andytoshi> and no, i don't think `or(true, pk())` is trivial
11:16 < sanket1729> makes sense
11:16 < sanket1729> Pushing a new commit
11:18 < sanket1729> If you don't have specific complaint, i would like to migrate from travis to github actions for rust-miniscript too. 
11:18 < sanket1729> It's much faster
11:21 < sanket1729> My simplicity experience has been really good. 
11:27 < andytoshi> sure
11:27 < andytoshi> can you PR to do that?
11:28 -!- afilini_ [~user@gateway/tor-sasl/afilini] has joined ##miniscript     
11:28 < sanket1729> Yep     
11:29 < andytoshi> sanket1729: unrelatedly, i wonder why we require and() and or() to always have at least 2 arguments
11:29 < andytoshi> i guess this makes sense
11:29 < andytoshi> 0 or 1 args would be confusing ... 0 might cause parse errors
11:30 -!- afilini [~user@gateway/tor-sasl/afilini] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
11:37 < andytoshi> sanket1729: lol have you tried running the enteailment function with 24 terminals?
11:37 < sanket1729> Is there some bug.
11:37 < sanket1729> Is there some bug?
11:37 < andytoshi> no, it's just slow
11:37 < andytoshi> i assume
11:37 < andytoshi> 2^24 is a lot for something like this where we're de/allocating
11:38 < sanket1729> I tried for 18. 
11:38 < sanket1729> 24 is 64 times worse for sure
11:38 < sanket1729> 2^24 is ~10Mb?
11:39 < andytoshi> no, 2^20 is 1M
11:39 < andytoshi> 2^24 is 16M
11:39 < andytoshi> ok, sure, 16 is roughly 10 :P
11:39 < sanket1729> I can try running for 24 locally
11:40 < andytoshi> `time cargo test entail` takes 0.8s on my laptop
11:40 < andytoshi> yeah i'm going to as well
11:42 < andytoshi> ok, in debug mode it akes 9.7s on my laptop to do 24
11:44 < andytoshi> in release mode it's 0.3s
11:44 < andytoshi> hmm     
11:45 < andytoshi> maybe this is ok
11:45 < andytoshi> but i think we shuold reduce it to 20
11:45 < sanket1729> sure, lets do 20. 
11:46 < andytoshi> :ok_hand:
12:20 -!- afilini_ [~user@gateway/tor-sasl/afilini] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.8]     
13:31 < sanket1729> andytoshi: I don't know how you can verify github actions
13:31 < sanket1729> But you can look at the build in my repo
13:32 < andytoshi> sanket1729: heh ok
13:32 < andytoshi> which branch
13:32 < andytoshi> oh master
13:32 < sanket1729> Yeah,
13:32 < sanket1729> oops I guess I messed up the abdge
13:33 < sanket1729> Nah, it is correct. The badge must be for rust-miniscript repo
13:34 < sanket1729> and not for snaket1729/rust-miniscript
13:34 < sanket1729> I also separated out the fuzzing into a separate job
13:34 < andytoshi> hmm, i'm suspicious of your change to contrib/test.sh
13:34 < andytoshi> it looks like you unconditionally `exit 0`
13:34 < andytoshi> after fuzzing
13:35 < sanket1729> Yeah, the other tests are run in separate job
13:35 < andytoshi> but what if the fuzzing fails
13:36 < sanket1729> There is set -e ./test_fuzz.sh
13:36 < sanket1729> So, it won't ever reach that point
13:36 < sanket1729> We always had stop at fail. 
13:37 < sanket1729> For more clarity, I can separate the fuzz code in separate file 
13:39 < andytoshi> oh i see
13:39 < andytoshi> no it's ok, i missed the set e
13:39 < andytoshi> -e     
13:39 < andytoshi> alright, so you could just PR this commit to rust-miniscript
13:39 < andytoshi> and then i can mess with the github settings
13:39 < sanket1729> It is in OR
13:39 < sanket1729> *PR     
13:39 < sanket1729> And the build is working on sanket1729/master
13:40 < andytoshi> oh, you just opened it
13:41 < andytoshi> ok merged ... but now i'm not sure what else i need to do
13:41 < sanket1729> Yeah, just did
13:41 < sanket1729> Nothing
13:41 < andytoshi> looks like actions are enabled by default
13:41 < sanket1729> You can see in actions tab for this PR. 
13:41 < sanket1729> I don;t know what happens for the current open PRs
13:42 < andytoshi> ah i see
13:42 < andytoshi> heh looks like current open PRs do not get CI
13:42 < sanket1729> I will look into it
13:44 < andytoshi> ok 120 looks good now
13:44 < andytoshi> tho i gotta do some manual CI work :P
13:44 < sanket1729> let me try to repush
13:44 < sanket1729> with updated timestamp
13:44 < andytoshi> kk     
13:45 < andytoshi> ok yep, it showed up in the actions tab
13:45 < sanket1729> In the open PR too
13:45 < sanket1729> like travis
13:45 < andytoshi> ah yep, there we go
13:45 < sanket1729> This is 20 jobs on better spec machines for free tier
13:46 < andytoshi> nice
13:47 < andytoshi> ok. i also added a bunch of rules to the repo, can't merge without CI passing and can't merge without review anymore
13:47 < andytoshi> i probably should've turned that on a while ago :P
13:48 < andytoshi> i changed your access level from Write to Admin
13:48 < sanket1729> Awesome.
13:49 < sanket1729> I am off for the next hour. Getting a haircut after 1 year :O
13:51 < andytoshi> haha nice!
13:51 < andytoshi> i just cut my own hair :P
13:52 < sanket1729> #120 is also waiting for travis
13:52 < sanket1729> that we don't hav eanymore
13:53 < andytoshi> oh lol, good catch
13:53 < andytoshi> that's fine, i'll force merge it
14:07 < andytoshi> looks like #119 has some unadressed nits
14:51 < sanket1729> andytoshi: Did you review 119 completely. I thought the comments were only for the first few commits. 
14:51 < sanket1729> I can fix those and raise a PR for another review
14:51 < andytoshi> correct, the comments are just for the first couple commits
14:51 < sanket1729> and also there is the question where does the sighash method belong
14:52 < sanket1729> rust-bitcoin or rust-miniscript
14:52 < sanket1729> We have strong Script types in rust-miniscript. 
14:53 < sanket1729> But I guess conceptually it belongs in the rust-bitcoin?
14:53 < andytoshi> for psbt?
14:53 < andytoshi> it probably should go in rust-miniscript
14:53 < sanket1729> for a transaction
14:53 < andytoshi> rust-bitcoin doesn't really have a concept of descriptors so we can't implement sighash as effectively
14:54 < andytoshi> sometime in the future maybe rust-bitcoin should have basic descriptor support, and then we can revisit thsi
14:54 < sanket1729> So, we should do in context.rs in rust-miniscript
14:54 < andytoshi> yeah
14:55 < sanket1729> I will a separate PR for that. And then #119 can be updated to use that. 
14:57 < sanket1729> We were planning to as a part of #116 by afilini. But I guess this is independent from xpub PR. So I can tackle this separately. 
14:58 < sanket1729> Also, it would be good if you can at #70. It's trailing for a long time :) 
15:05 < andytoshi> heh, sure, i'll take another look at 70
15:22 < sanket1729> fn sighash(tx:&bitcoin::Transaction, descriptor:&Descriptor, input_index:usize, sighash:SigHashType,) -> SigHash;
15:22 < sanket1729> The signature of the sighash API
15:24 < sanket1729> I am reconfirming because this does not match your comment here: https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-miniscript/pull/116#discussion_r463295189
15:32 -!- sipa [~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024] has quit [Quit: leaving]     
15:45 < sanket1729> rust-bitcoin bip143.rs only has support for sighash_all()
16:56 < andytoshi> sanket1729: hmmm, do we need the descriptor?
16:56 < andytoshi> i guess we do
16:56 < andytoshi> to get the scriptcode and to know which kind of sighash algo to use
16:57 < andytoshi> re bip143.rs only having sighash_all(), do you think we need to PR the other sighash modes to rust-bitcoin for this to work?
16:57 < andytoshi> that has been a longstanding todo
17:00 < sanket1729> We also need prevout script_pubkey
17:01 < andytoshi> ah, yeah, to compute the scriptcode
17:01 < sanket1729> I can add the PR to rust-bitcoin
17:01 < andytoshi> heh that would be awesome
20:46 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-217-138.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
22:53 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
23:36 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
23:37 < sanket1729> my bad. It is already implemented :)
23:37 < sanket1729> There is a sighash cache that has the required functionality.
23:43 < sanket1729> I guess the new release of the code would have it