feat: use storage abstraction by matteojug-stacks · Pull Request #21 · stx-labs/sPoX

matteojug-stacks · 2026-04-16T16:50:06Z

Refactor to use a storage abstraction for the deposit addresses. We will add registered deposits from the contract in the storage in another PR.

Eventually we will use a proper storage, but for now a naive in-memory thingy should work just fine.

Testing information

Tested locally used the testing instruction from tests/README.md, the whole flow was also tested locally with spox registry aware + front end (coming soon™)

Copilot

Pull request overview

Refactors deposit-address tracking to go through a storage abstraction (backed by an in-memory store for now), preparing for future registry-driven deposits.

Changes:

Introduce Storage trait plus in-memory SharedStore implementation to hold monitored deposits and registry cursor state.
Move MonitoredDeposit model out of deposit_monitor into src/storage/model.rs and switch DepositMonitor to query storage at runtime.
Update CLI/output and test config/docs to align with the new monitored-deposit model and reclaim script parsing.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 10 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
tests/solo/spox.toml	Sets valid hex `reclaim_script` values for test deposits.
tests/README.md	Updates local demo instructions for funding signers.
src/storage/model.rs	Adds monitored-deposit data model + config conversion + scriptPubKey derivation.
src/storage/mod.rs	Defines `Storage` trait API for monitored deposits + registry cursor.
src/storage/memory.rs	Implements `Storage` via an in-memory `Arc<Mutex<...>>` store.
src/main.rs	Loads monitored deposits into storage and updates address-printing to use `source`.
src/lib.rs	Exposes new `storage` module from the library.
src/error.rs	Adds `PoisonedMutex` error used by in-memory storage.
src/deposit_monitor.rs	Switches monitoring logic from an internal map to storage lookups.
src/context.rs	Adds shared storage (and settings) to `Context` and exposes accessors.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-04-16T16:57:14Z

+#[derive(Debug, Clone, Default)]
+pub struct Store {
+    last_next_address_id: u64,
+    monitored: HashMap<ScriptBuf, MonitoredDeposit>,
+}


Store derives Clone, which will deep-clone the full HashMap<ScriptBuf, MonitoredDeposit> if it’s ever used, potentially causing unintended copies and extra allocations. Since callers should clone SharedStore (the Arc) instead, consider removing Clone from Store to prevent accidental expensive clones.

Copilot · 2026-04-16T16:57:14Z

+impl Storage for SharedStore {
+    /// Add a monitored deposit. If the script pubkey already exists it's a nop.
+    fn add(&self, monitored_deposit: MonitoredDeposit) -> Result<(), Error> {
+        let mut store = self.lock().map_err(|_| Error::PoisonedMutex)?;
+
+        let key = monitored_deposit.to_script_pubkey();
+        store.monitored.entry(key).or_insert(monitored_deposit);
+        Ok(())


The new in-memory Storage implementation introduces core behavior (deduping in add, correctness of get_scripts, and tracking last_next_address_id) but there are no unit tests covering it. Adding tests would help catch regressions as more storage backends and registry integration are introduced.

Copilot · 2026-04-16T16:57:14Z

+            )?,
+        })
+    }
+}


MonitoredDeposit::try_from contains non-trivial conversion logic (building DepositScriptInputs and validating ReclaimScriptInputs). Consider adding unit tests for this conversion (including invalid reclaim scripts / locktimes) so config parsing failures surface in a controlled way.

Suggested change

}

}

#[cfg(test)]

mod tests {

use super::*;

use bitcoin::opcodes::all::OP_TRUE;

use bitcoin::script::Builder;

use bitcoin::XOnlyPublicKey;

use clarity::vm::types::PrincipalData;

fn monitored_deposit_config(lock_time: u32, reclaim_script: ScriptBuf) -> MonitoredDepositConfig {

MonitoredDepositConfig {

signers_xonly: XOnlyPublicKey::from_str(

"79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798",

)

.unwrap(),

recipient: PrincipalData::parse_standard_principal("ST000000000000000000002AMW42H")

.unwrap(),

max_fee: 1_000,

lock_time,

reclaim_script,

}

}

#[test]

fn try_from_builds_monitored_deposit_for_valid_config() {

let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();

let reclaim_script = Builder::new().push_opcode(OP_TRUE).into_script();

let config = monitored_deposit_config(500, reclaim_script.clone());

let monitored = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config)).unwrap();

match monitored.source {

MonitoredDepositSource::Config(source_alias) => assert_eq!(source_alias, alias),

MonitoredDepositSource::Registry(_) => panic!("expected config source"),

}

assert_eq!(

monitored.deposit_script_inputs.signers_public_key,

config.signers_xonly

);

assert_eq!(monitored.deposit_script_inputs.recipient, config.recipient);

assert_eq!(monitored.deposit_script_inputs.max_fee, config.max_fee);

assert_eq!(

monitored.reclaim_script_inputs.reclaim_script(),

reclaim_script.as_script()

);

}

#[test]

fn try_from_returns_error_for_invalid_reclaim_script() {

let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();

let config = monitored_deposit_config(500, ScriptBuf::new());

let result = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config));

assert!(result.is_err());

}

#[test]

fn try_from_returns_error_for_invalid_lock_time() {

let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();

let reclaim_script = Builder::new().push_opcode(OP_TRUE).into_script();

let config = monitored_deposit_config(0, reclaim_script);

let result = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config));

assert!(result.is_err());

}

}

Copilot · 2026-04-16T16:57:15Z

        &self.emily_config
    }
+
+    /// Get a reference to the storage


The docstring says this returns “a reference to the storage”, but the function returns a cloned SharedStore handle (Arc<Mutex<...>>). Consider rewording to avoid implying a borrowed reference (e.g., “Get a handle to the shared storage”).

Suggested change

/// Get a reference to the storage

/// Get a handle to the shared storage

feat: use storage abstraction

00bb35c

matteojug-stacks requested a review from Copilot April 16, 2026 16:50

matteojug-stacks self-assigned this Apr 16, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of matteojug-stacks April 16, 2026 16:50 View session

matteojug-stacks mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2026

feat: add registry config #20

Merged

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: use storage abstraction#21

feat: use storage abstraction#21
matteojug-stacks wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
feat/storage-layer

matteojug-stacks commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

-}
+}
+#[cfg(test)]
+mod tests {
+    use super::*;
+    use bitcoin::opcodes::all::OP_TRUE;
+    use bitcoin::script::Builder;
+    use bitcoin::XOnlyPublicKey;
+    use clarity::vm::types::PrincipalData;
+    fn monitored_deposit_config(lock_time: u32, reclaim_script: ScriptBuf) -> MonitoredDepositConfig {
+        MonitoredDepositConfig {
+            signers_xonly: XOnlyPublicKey::from_str(
+                "79be667ef9dcbbac55a06295ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798",
+            )
+            .unwrap(),
+            recipient: PrincipalData::parse_standard_principal("ST000000000000000000002AMW42H")
+                .unwrap(),
+            max_fee: 1_000,
+            lock_time,
+            reclaim_script,
+        }
+    }
+    #[test]
+    fn try_from_builds_monitored_deposit_for_valid_config() {
+        let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();
+        let reclaim_script = Builder::new().push_opcode(OP_TRUE).into_script();
+        let config = monitored_deposit_config(500, reclaim_script.clone());
+        let monitored = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config)).unwrap();
+        match monitored.source {
+            MonitoredDepositSource::Config(source_alias) => assert_eq!(source_alias, alias),
+            MonitoredDepositSource::Registry(_) => panic!("expected config source"),
+        }
+        assert_eq!(
+            monitored.deposit_script_inputs.signers_public_key,
+            config.signers_xonly
+        );
+        assert_eq!(monitored.deposit_script_inputs.recipient, config.recipient);
+        assert_eq!(monitored.deposit_script_inputs.max_fee, config.max_fee);
+        assert_eq!(
+            monitored.reclaim_script_inputs.reclaim_script(),
+            reclaim_script.as_script()
+        );
+    }
+    #[test]
+    fn try_from_returns_error_for_invalid_reclaim_script() {
+        let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();
+        let config = monitored_deposit_config(500, ScriptBuf::new());
+        let result = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config));
+        assert!(result.is_err());
+    }
+    #[test]
+    fn try_from_returns_error_for_invalid_lock_time() {
+        let alias = "test-deposit".to_string();
+        let reclaim_script = Builder::new().push_opcode(OP_TRUE).into_script();
+        let config = monitored_deposit_config(0, reclaim_script);
+        let result = MonitoredDeposit::try_from((&alias, &config));
+        assert!(result.is_err());
+    }
+}

	/// Get a reference to the storage
	/// Get a handle to the shared storage

Conversation

matteojug-stacks commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Testing information

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

matteojug-stacks commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading