After participating in a deep-dive on libbitcoinkernel, I noticed that the BlockHeader API did not provide a simple way to access the Merkle root.
This PR adds a method to the BlockHeader API to retrieve the Merkle root from a block header. It also introduces a wrapper for Merkle roots, including support for serialization to bytes, copying, destruction, and comparison, and adds tests to verify that the expected values are returned.
Introduce btck_BlockMerkleRoot as a type-safe wrapper for a block's Merkle root. Adds functions to retrieve the Merkle root from a block header, copy and destroy it, check for equality, and serialize it to bytes.
<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
<!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36194.
<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->
See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process.
| Type | Reviewers |
|---|---|
| Concept ACK | sedited, stickies-v, jjamming |
If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code><!--meta-tag:bot-skip--></code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.
<!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->
Concept ACK
Concept ACK.
I think this should be a block_header instead of a block attribute, though. I'm also not sure we need a separate btck_BlockMerkleRoot type for this? Would a simple void btck_block_header_get_merkle_root(const btck_BlockHeader* header, unsigned char output[32]) not suffice?
Would a simple void btck_block_header_get_merkle_root(const btck_BlockHeader* header, unsigned char output[32]) not suffice?
I think I'd prefer that too.
Concept ACK