Skip to content

Add and Revise Receiver Interface Comments#1710

Open
xstoicunicornx wants to merge 3 commits into
payjoin:masterfrom
xstoicunicornx:update-comments
Open

Add and Revise Receiver Interface Comments#1710
xstoicunicornx wants to merge 3 commits into
payjoin:masterfrom
xstoicunicornx:update-comments

Conversation

@xstoicunicornx

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

This PR builds off of #1653 which added clear and consistent comments to the FFI receiver interface where they were missing before. This PR expands that work to revise the v1 and v2 comments to align closely with the patterns established in the FFI interface and add consistency to the doc strings between all the different typestates and interfaces. The goal of this PR was to make the documentation on how to use these receiver interfaces more clear and concise, and if deemed a strict improvement might be good to include in PDK v1.0 release.

Claude Opus 4.8 was used to collaboratively create and revise these doc strings.

Pull Request Checklist

Please confirm the following before requesting review:

@coveralls

coveralls commented Jul 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Coverage Report for CI Build 28692163209

Coverage remained the same at 85.938%

Details

  • Coverage remained the same as the base build.
  • Patch coverage: No coverable lines changed in this PR.
  • 1 coverage regression across 1 file.

Uncovered Changes

No uncovered changes found.

Coverage Regressions

1 previously-covered line in 1 file lost coverage.

File Lines Losing Coverage Coverage
payjoin/src/core/receive/v2/mod.rs 1 91.96%

Coverage Stats

Coverage Status
Relevant Lines: 15538
Covered Lines: 13353
Line Coverage: 85.94%
Coverage Strength: 350.92 hits per line

💛 - Coveralls

Rework the doc comments in the v2 receive module so the state-level
comments are concise and point to the method that advances to the next
typestate, while the per-method comments align with the wording added to
the FFI interface. Method docs now name their explicit transition return
type and describe the state each transition yields once successfully
persisted.
Apply the same doc comment rework to the v1 receive module: state-level
comments are concise and point to the method that advances to the next
typestate, while per-method comments align with the wording used in the
FFI interface. Unlike v2, v1 methods return the next state directly, so
the docs describe the returned state without transition or persistence
framing.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants