Skip to content
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

blockchain: Refactor block idx entry serialization. #1069

Conversation

davecgh
Copy link
Member

@davecgh davecgh commented Feb 23, 2018

This modifies the newly added block index serialization code to use a separate structure as opposed to working with block nodes directly.

This approach is more desirable because it provides better separation and more robust code against changes to the block node structure itself and it avoids complications dealing with non-serialized fields such as
parent and child pointers.

Copy link
Member

@dajohi dajohi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok

@davecgh davecgh force-pushed the blockchain_refactor_blockindex_entry_serialization branch from b2607d1 to 3588610 Compare February 23, 2018 20:33
This modifies the newly added block index serialization code to use a
separate structure as opposed to working with block nodes directly.

This approach is more desirable because it provides better separation
and more robust code against changes to the block node structure itself
and it avoids complications dealing with non-serialized fields such as
parent and child pointers.
@davecgh davecgh force-pushed the blockchain_refactor_blockindex_entry_serialization branch from 3588610 to b4d9d44 Compare February 23, 2018 20:36
@davecgh davecgh merged commit b4d9d44 into decred:master Feb 23, 2018
@davecgh davecgh deleted the blockchain_refactor_blockindex_entry_serialization branch February 23, 2018 21:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants