Merge bitcoindevkit/bdk#478: Fix typos in comments

7f8103dd76 Fix typos in comments (thunderbiscuit)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  This PR fixes a bunch of small typos in comments. I'm getting acquainted with the codebase and found a few typos just by chance, and ended up going through it with an IDE searching for typos in all files.

  ### Notes to the reviewers

  To be clear, this PR _only addresses typos that are within comments_.

  ### Checklists

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing

ACKs for top commit:
  notmandatory:
    ACK 7f8103dd76

Tree-SHA512: eb3f8f21cbd05de06292affd9ef69c21b52022dfdf25c562c8f4d9c9c011f18175dff0c650cb7efcfb2b665f2af80d9a153be3d12327c47796b0d00bfd5d9803
This commit is contained in:
Steve Myers
2021-11-30 16:19:01 -08:00
14 changed files with 17 additions and 17 deletions

View File

@@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ impl<D: Database> CoinSelectionAlgorithm<D> for BranchAndBoundCoinSelection {
impl BranchAndBoundCoinSelection {
// TODO: make this more Rust-onic :)
// (And perhpaps refactor with less arguments?)
// (And perhaps refactor with less arguments?)
#[allow(clippy::too_many_arguments)]
fn bnb(
&self,

View File

@@ -721,7 +721,7 @@ where
/// Bump the fee of a transaction previously created with this wallet.
///
/// Returns an error if the transaction is already confirmed or doesn't explicitly signal
/// *repalce by fee* (RBF). If the transaction can be fee bumped then it returns a [`TxBuilder`]
/// *replace by fee* (RBF). If the transaction can be fee bumped then it returns a [`TxBuilder`]
/// pre-populated with the inputs and outputs of the original transaction.
///
/// ## Example
@@ -1059,7 +1059,7 @@ where
&self.secp
}
/// Returns the descriptor used to create adddresses for a particular `keychain`.
/// Returns the descriptor used to create addresses for a particular `keychain`.
pub fn get_descriptor_for_keychain(&self, keychain: KeychainKind) -> &ExtendedDescriptor {
let (descriptor, _) = self._get_descriptor_for_keychain(keychain);
descriptor

View File

@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ pub enum SignerError {
InvalidNonWitnessUtxo,
/// The `witness_utxo` field of the transaction is required to sign this input
MissingWitnessUtxo,
/// The `witness_script` field of the transaction is requied to sign this input
/// The `witness_script` field of the transaction is required to sign this input
MissingWitnessScript,
/// The fingerprint and derivation path are missing from the psbt input
MissingHdKeypath,
@@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ impl Signer for PrivateKey {
}
// FIXME: use the presence of `witness_utxo` as an indication that we should make a bip143
// sig. Does this make sense? Should we add an extra argument to explicitly swith between
// sig. Does this make sense? Should we add an extra argument to explicitly switch between
// these? The original idea was to declare sign() as sign<Ctx: ScriptContex>() and use Ctx,
// but that violates the rules for trait-objects, so we can't do it.
let (hash, sighash) = match psbt.inputs[input_index].witness_utxo {

View File

@@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ impl<'a, B, D: BatchDatabase, Cs: CoinSelectionAlgorithm<D>, Ctx: TxBuilderConte
/// 2. `psbt_input`: To know the value.
/// 3. `satisfaction_weight`: To know how much weight/vbytes the input will add to the transaction for fee calculation.
///
/// There are several security concerns about adding foregin UTXOs that application
/// There are several security concerns about adding foreign UTXOs that application
/// developers should consider. First, how do you know the value of the input is correct? If a
/// `non_witness_utxo` is provided in the `psbt_input` then this method implicitly verifies the
/// value by checking it against the transaction. If only a `witness_utxo` is provided then this