Correct step number in `get_route`

diff --git a/lightning/src/routing/router.rs b/lightning/src/routing/router.rs
index 325920b778151bafbfa98c8d610af77b7cb7ca41..7679125cf5fe7ff91dea35bc4f327da5c234c9ea 100644 (file)
--- a/lightning/src/routing/router.rs
+++ b/lightning/src/routing/router.rs
@@ -897,7 +897,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                        },
                }
 
-               // Step (1).
+               // Step (2).
                // If a caller provided us with last hops, add them to routing targets. Since this happens
                // earlier than general path finding, they will be somewhat prioritized, although currently
                // it matters only if the fees are exactly the same.
@@ -995,7 +995,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                // last hops communicated by the caller, and the payment receiver.
                let mut found_new_path = false;
 
-               // Step (2).
+               // Step (3).
                // If this loop terminates due the exhaustion of targets, two situations are possible:
                // - not enough outgoing liquidity:
                //   0 < already_collected_value_msat < final_value_msat
@@ -1130,7 +1130,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                        break 'paths_collection;
                }
 
-               // Step (3).
+               // Step (4).
                // Stop either when the recommended value is reached or if no new path was found in this
                // iteration.
                // In the latter case, making another path finding attempt won't help,
@@ -1154,7 +1154,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                }
        }
 
-       // Step (4).
+       // Step (5).
        if payment_paths.len() == 0 {
                return Err(LightningError{err: "Failed to find a path to the given destination".to_owned(), action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError});
        }
@@ -1175,12 +1175,12 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                let mut cur_route = Vec::<PaymentPath>::new();
                let mut aggregate_route_value_msat = 0;
 
-               // Step (5).
+               // Step (6).
                // TODO: real random shuffle
                // Currently just starts with i_th and goes up to i-1_th in a looped way.
                let cur_payment_paths = [&payment_paths[i..], &payment_paths[..i]].concat();
 
-               // Step (6).
+               // Step (7).
                for payment_path in cur_payment_paths {
                        cur_route.push(payment_path.clone());
                        aggregate_route_value_msat += payment_path.get_value_msat();
@@ -1219,7 +1219,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
 
                                assert!(cur_route.len() > 0);
 
-                               // Step (7).
+                               // Step (8).
                                // Now, substract the overpaid value from the most-expensive path.
                                // TODO: this could also be optimized by also sorting by feerate_per_sat_routed,
                                // so that the sender pays less fees overall. And also htlc_minimum_msat.
@@ -1236,7 +1236,7 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
                drawn_routes.push(cur_route);
        }
 
-       // Step (8).
+       // Step (9).
        // Select the best route by lowest total fee.
        drawn_routes.sort_by_key(|paths| paths.iter().map(|path| path.get_total_fee_paid_msat()).sum::<u64>());
        let mut selected_paths = Vec::<Vec<RouteHop>>::new();