What the developer wrote
Authored by radik878
docs: fix inconsistance in comment
What changed, and why it matters
This commit corrects a typo in a code comment. The actual numeric constant was already correct (0x15); only the comment above it wrongly said 0x14. There is no functional code change and therefore no security impact.
No action required; this is a documentation-only typo fix.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
In bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rs, the doc comment for PSBT_IN_TAP_LEAF_SCRIPT previously listed the value as 0x14, which duplicates PSBT_IN_TAP_SCRIPT_SIG. The const definition itself was already 0x15, matching BIP 174. The patch updates the comment to 0x15. No executable code was modified.
Changed components
bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rsInspect captured patch +1 / −1
diff --git a/bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rs b/bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rs
index 6974da8e..f0f2f006 100644
--- a/bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rs
+++ b/bitcoin/src/psbt/map/input.rs
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ const PSBT_IN_HASH256: u64 = 0x0d;
const PSBT_IN_TAP_KEY_SIG: u64 = 0x13;
/// Type: Taproot Signature in Script Spend PSBT_IN_TAP_SCRIPT_SIG = 0x14
const PSBT_IN_TAP_SCRIPT_SIG: u64 = 0x14;
-/// Type: Taproot Leaf Script PSBT_IN_TAP_LEAF_SCRIPT = 0x14
+/// Type: Taproot Leaf Script PSBT_IN_TAP_LEAF_SCRIPT = 0x15
const PSBT_IN_TAP_LEAF_SCRIPT: u64 = 0x15;
/// Type: Taproot Key BIP-0032 Derivation Path PSBT_IN_TAP_BIP32_DERIVATION = 0x16
const PSBT_IN_TAP_BIP32_DERIVATION: u64 = 0x16;
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.