You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Why does Mnemonic::parse_in_normalized_without_checksum_check exist? Isn't the main usefulness of this crate the fact that Mnemonic instances are guaranteed to be valid? Now if someone writes an application that presents a Mnemonic to a user, they have to manually trace the source of its initialization and make sure it wasn't created with parse_in_normalized_without_checksum_check or else they risk presenting an invalid mnemonic.
It makes sense for possibly-invalid mnemonics and operations thereof to be in scope of this crate, but I feel like their implementation shouldn't break the checksum validity invariant of Mnemonic. That way, application authors can simply trust that Mnemonic instances are valid.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Why does
Mnemonic::parse_in_normalized_without_checksum_check
exist? Isn't the main usefulness of this crate the fact thatMnemonic
instances are guaranteed to be valid? Now if someone writes an application that presents a Mnemonic to a user, they have to manually trace the source of its initialization and make sure it wasn't created withparse_in_normalized_without_checksum_check
or else they risk presenting an invalid mnemonic.It makes sense for possibly-invalid mnemonics and operations thereof to be in scope of this crate, but I feel like their implementation shouldn't break the checksum validity invariant of
Mnemonic
. That way, application authors can simply trust thatMnemonic
instances are valid.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: