What the developer wrote
Authored by Mitchell Bagot
Remove unused const values
The const values SEGWIT_MARKER and SEGWIT_FLAG are only used in
consensus encoding code. Since the duplicate implementation in bitcoin
for the old traits is being deleted, the duplicates of these const
values can be removed and only the copies in primitives left.
Remove const values SEGWIT_MARKER and SEGWIT_FLAG.
What changed, and why it matters
This commit simply deletes two unused internal constant definitions (SEGWIT_MARKER and SEGWIT_FLAG) from one source file because identical copies already exist elsewhere in the project. It is a routine code cleanup with no functional or security change.
No security action required; treat as normal refactoring.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The diff removes two private u8 constants, SEGWIT_MARKER (0x00) and SEGWIT_FLAG (0x01), from bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rs. The commit message states these duplicates are no longer needed after the corresponding old trait implementation was deleted; the canonical copies remain in the primitives crate. No call sites, logic, or public API is altered.
Changed components
bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rsInspect captured patch +0 / −6
diff --git a/bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rs b/bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rs
index 9314da01..7d791b26 100644
--- a/bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rs
+++ b/bitcoin/src/blockdata/transaction.rs
@@ -64,12 +64,6 @@ internal_macros::define_extension_trait! {
}
}
-// Duplicated in `primitives`.
-/// The marker MUST be a 1-byte zero value: 0x00. (BIP-0141)
-const SEGWIT_MARKER: u8 = 0x00;
-/// The flag MUST be a 1-byte non-zero value. Currently, 0x01 MUST be used. (BIP-0141)
-const SEGWIT_FLAG: u8 = 0x01;
-
internal_macros::define_extension_trait! {
/// Extension functionality for the [`OutPoint`] type.
pub trait OutPointExt impl for OutPoint {
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.