rust-bitcoin / rust-bitcoin/rust-miniscript
Inconsistent input size estimation from the planning module
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 426
- Forks
- 200
- Avg merge
- 7d 17h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 8
Description
plan() takes into account the leaf script + control block for Taproot but not the witness script for P2WSH. This results in getting the maximum witness size for the plan (witness_size()) sometimes taking into account the full satisfaction size (under Taproot) and sometimes not (under P2WSH), which is rather confusing.
As a hack we leveraged the explicit_script function to add the script size only under P2WSH since it returns None for Taproot: https://github.com/wizardsardine/liana/blob/bdc0b50ad9780ea29b77703c513a99fb5876fb21/src/descriptors/mod.rs#L261-L274
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 with the planning module's plan() and witness_size() paths, then inspect src/descriptors/mod.rs around explicit_script(), as referenced in the issue. Trace how Taproot and P2WSH satisfaction sizes are accounted for and add or update focused tests that demonstrate consistent maximum witness-size estimation for both descriptor types.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- blockchain, cryptography
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 42/100