Lloyd Fournier

Yes Concept ACK. Most likely the implementer was trying to do this but made an off-by-one error.

@notmandatory what about doing it like I suggested here: https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/issues/1153#issuecomment-1752263555

> Suggestion from [#1153 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/issues/1153#issuecomment-1752263555) > > ```rust > let things_I_am_interested_in = wallet.lock().unwrap().start_sync(); > let update = electrum_or_esplora.sync(things_i_am_interested_in)?; > wallet.lock().unwrap().apply_update(update)?: > ``` > > @evanlinjin where I'm at right now...

@notmandatory to do it on `FullScanRequest` I think your going to need to store a `Box` for each keychain. Presumably you want to inspect each iterator with the same function....

In esplora it should not be an option it just should be done. The information is already fetched it just isn't inserted. With electrum I guess you have to make...

That seems like a reasonable approach. The problem is that we will now need to create `async` versions to satisfy `async` people. But maybe we can make an exception here...

I think perhaps we just need to have `KeychainTxOutIndex::unreveal_last_spk(keychain)` which would be enough to solve the immediate problem without crashing the application.

I don't think `TxOutIndexer` a more descriptive name of a trait which has a method called `index_tx`. If I were to rename it to anything is would be `TxIndexer` sine...

Thanks for bringing up this point. I think we should never change this for structures in `bdk_chain` once we have a proper release. Adding new functionality should be adding a...

> Thanks for bringing up this point. I think we should never change this for structures in `bdk_chain` once we have a proper release. Adding new functionality should be adding...