rust-bitcoin / rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin
Are we happy with `units::parse`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 2.7k
- Forks
- 1k
- Avg merge
- 4d 1h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 88
Description
We want to release units 1.0, are we 100% happy with the parse module. I ask because:
- Its only in
unitsbecause there is no where better (only theParseIntErroris used byunits) - Its kind of just a bunch of not totally related utils
- A richer error type
- Some abstractions for what we think is a good way of handling hex prefixes
- A code de-duplication macro for string parsing
I'm not sure there is a better solution or that its worth putting too much time into. I just wanted to get consensus that we are happy with it please.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the units::parse module and tracing its users, especially the ParseIntError usage in units. Review the richer error type, hex-prefix abstractions, and string-parsing macro, then compare their ownership and cohesion before proposing a decision. Done means reaching consensus on whether the module is suitable for units 1.0 and what, if anything, should change.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100