fix: use isolates in bip340 event verifier

[frnandu]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 71.64%. Comparing base (61b39b1) to head (1533678).
⚠️ Report is 9 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../repositories/verifiers/bip340_event_verifier.dart	80.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #345   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.64%   71.64%           
=======================================
  Files         142      142           
  Lines        5283     5287    +4     
=======================================
+ Hits         3785     3788    +3     
- Misses       1498     1499    +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[1-leo]

can we merge #327 (and #332)
before?
Then we can reuse the isolate, reducing the overhead:

Used like this:

    final data = await IsolateManager.instance
        .runInComputeIsolate<PARAMTYPE, RETURNTYPE>(
      <function>,
      <params>
    );

    final data = await IsolateManager.instance
        .runInComputeIsolate<_MiningParams, Nip01Event>(
      _mineEventInIsolate,
      _MiningParams(
        event: event,
        targetDifficulty: targetDifficulty,
        maxIterations: maxIterations ?? 1000000,
      ),
    );
    

[1-leo]

#345 (comment)

[frnandu]

can we merge #327 (and #332) before? Then we can reuse the isolate, reducing the overhead:

Used like this:

    final data = await IsolateManager.instance
        .runInComputeIsolate<PARAMTYPE, RETURNTYPE>(
      <function>,
      <params>
    );

    final data = await IsolateManager.instance
        .runInComputeIsolate<_MiningParams, Nip01Event>(
      _mineEventInIsolate,
      _MiningParams(
        event: event,
        targetDifficulty: targetDifficulty,
        maxIterations: maxIterations ?? 1000000,
      ),
    );
    

depends if performance-wise verifying a lot of events proves to be noticeable better with Isolate.run than using only 1 isolate for all events sequentially ....(assuming no pool mechanism exists or be added in near-term to IsolateManager)

[frnandu]

applied the fix from #346 and changed to use IsolateManager.instance.runInComputeIsolate so should be ready to merge