I think what we're calling seed has already been named secret. If that's the case, we should probably stick to the existing nomenclature.
[x] create an option --seed <seed> which accepts a specific seed (probably as hex?)
perhaps this should be a subcommand fromsecret for compatibility? or use the flag --from-secret for recognition?
[x] rename --static-seed to --from-example-secret and show the seed secret in the output?
[x] --gen-dash-from-secret seems redundant - a matter of documentation, not implementation
I'm really torn on the fromsecret thing... that doesn't make since to have the input be "secret" and the output also be "secret. Perhaps an alias would be best:
fromsecret, --from-secret : alias of `--seed`, for compatibility with `dash-cli`
wmerfalen
commented
1 year ago
I think what we're calling
seedhas already been namedsecret. If that's the case, we should probably stick to the existing nomenclature.--seed <seed>which accepts a specific seed (probably as hex?)fromsecretfor compatibility? or use the flag--from-secretfor recognition?--static-seedto--from-example-secretand show the seed secret in the output?--gen-dash-from-secretseems redundant - a matter of documentation, not implementationI'm really torn on the
fromsecretthing... that doesn't make since to have the input be "secret" and the output also be "secret. Perhaps an alias would be best: