AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 15 Bitcoin

Merge rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#6741: units: Add and standardise doc and comment links

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Andrew Poelstra

100/100 · Strong
Merge rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#6741: units: Add and standardise doc and comment links

0004759e3865caf677c1ecad2f9df5a50f53acfa units: Replace in-line links with tag links (Mitchell Bagot)
d2675c71655e48e1d93617750c8f9ae5106bcd86 Fix blank space in doc link (Mitchell Bagot)
e5ac2a6c5aa641f1cb9bd5b81cda40992db1c1eb units: Add links to docs (Mitchell Bagot)

Pull request description:

The C-LINK docs guideline recommends including links for types and modules throughout the public-facing documentation. Additionally, at least in VSCode, these links can be followed through Ctrl-Click, even when in private code comments. As such, all types and modules should be modified to links to improve both user docs readability, and code navigation.


ACKs for top commit:
satsfy:
ACK 0004759
apoelstra:
ACK 0004759e3865caf677c1ecad2f9df5a50f53acfa; successfully ran local tests
tcharding:
ACK 0004759e3865caf677c1ecad2f9df5a50f53acfa I didn't check all changes in patch 1 because satsfy seems to have been most thorough.


Tree-SHA512: 2e0f265af2f996ef0c62564587882a77418eeb974293f083ad806aa02b530347ada5ae260757838b2e98002a46b896ff348498c404d3b01816352a49e6fd7829
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Explains rationale or failure mode✓ Mentions testing or verification✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit only changes documentation comments and doc links in the rust-bitcoin 'units' crate. It replaces plain-text type names with clickable Rustdoc links and fixes a minor blank-space issue in a doc link. There are no code behavior changes, no API changes, and no security fixes.

Recommended action

No security action required. Treat as a normal documentation-only merge; verify docs build cleanly if desired.

Security signals we found

No strong security signals were identified.

Risk score

Why this scored 15/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 0/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 0/15
Confidence 10/10
Evidence quality 5/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.