Fwiw the following rather horrifying hack "works":
let bin_bh: [u8; 32] = hex::FromHex::from_hex("deadbeef...").unwrap();
let mut next = BlockHash::from_raw_hash(sha256d::Hash::from_byte_array(bin_bh));
(replacing the above linked definition of next ; of course you have to add the use statement: use bitcoin::hashes::{hex, sha256d, Hash};)
... where deabeef.. is the big-endian encoding of a block hash. But "works" with caveats:
- the block hash used there should be that of the first block in your database, identifiable with
bitcoin-cli getblockchaininfo (but I guess it changes over time, so you need to have bitcoind not running)
- defining
start_height and end_height doesn't work (at least, in my test), because I think with this hack it treats your first block as literally block 1 (or 0, whatever).
Still, it does output the data I wanted from a filter, so, it (barely) passes the bar of at least being worth reporting.
Originally posted by @AdamISZ in #83 (comment)
(replacing the above linked definition of
next; of course you have to add theusestatement:use bitcoin::hashes::{hex, sha256d, Hash};)... where
deabeef..is the big-endian encoding of a block hash. But "works" with caveats:bitcoin-cli getblockchaininfo(but I guess it changes over time, so you need to have bitcoind not running)start_heightandend_heightdoesn't work (at least, in my test), because I think with this hack it treats your first block as literally block 1 (or 0, whatever).Still, it does output the data I wanted from a filter, so, it (barely) passes the bar of at least being worth reporting.
Originally posted by @AdamISZ in #83 (comment)