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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
invoices: add subscribesingleinvoice #2356
invoices: add subscribesingleinvoice #2356
Changes from 1 commit
1869866
bacd924
3545685
78cd075
2a4c93c
436dd41
acb0162
4c4536a
70c874b
8996a14
b163571
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
right... this creates a dependency on the parent package. Would it make sense to re-define the
Invoice
type in this new package, if we plan to deprecate the type fromlnrpc
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is code duplication, how does it make it better? I don't mind this as a temporary structure. Would you like it more if the dependency was reversed? So make the main rpc depend on invoices rpc?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think it'd be worth protecting this with a compare and swap to prevent us from accidentally closing the same channel twice, as it would lead us to panic during shutdown. Start should be fine though since it's a NOP
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Calling
Stop()
twice is invalid use of the subserver and adding the compare/swap would camouflage this. We would loose the opportunity to discover the bug of the caller. In general I'd like to avoid defensive code, unless we are dealing with legacy that has become too complicate to reason about and we want to take no risk.