Move NullifierTree and BlockChain from node#1304
Merged
PhilippGackstatter merged 15 commits intonextfrom May 5, 2025
Merged
Conversation
This was referenced Apr 28, 2025
bobbinth
approved these changes
May 3, 2025
Contributor
bobbinth
left a comment
bobbinth
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! Thank you! I left some comments inline - but all of them are pretty minor.
| /// # Errors | ||
| /// | ||
| /// Returns an error if: | ||
| /// - the nullifier was already spent. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we clarify here that this only applies if two nullifiers were spent in different blocks?
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Moves the
NullifierTreeandBlockChainfrom miden-node to miden-base.Notable changes/additions:
NullifierTreeensures that every nullifier is only spent once.BlockChaindoes not assume that the genesis block is always present. This assumption from miden-node is not nicely compatible withMockChainand this seems like a miden-node level guarantee instead of a protocol-level guarantee. The only impact is thatBlockChain::chain_tipreturnsOption<BlockNumber>rather thanBlockNumber. This is easily fixable in miden-node by moving the assumption (theexpect) toInnerState::latest_block_num.BlockChain. I.e. usingBlockNumberinstead ofusizeas the "forest" for the chain, which is named "state block" as a concept. "Forest" does not really make sense in the block chain context and I find state block somewhat clearer (see the type level docs for an explanation).Builds on top of #1301 to be able to address all the changes in miden-node in one PR.
closes #1302
Note that I will address #1173 in a separate PR.