I do have one question from testing: when I try with Alice’s address

pop convert address 5GrwvaEF5zXb26Fz9rcQpDWS57CtERHpNehXCPcNoHGKutQY
I get the following error:

Error: Invalid address: last 12 bytes must be 0xEE

The reason it does not work with Alice's public key is because the operation is not reversible. If you recalculate the Polkadot address out of the resulting 20 bytes the account would be different, since Alice's public key bytes does not end in 0xeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

We could threat this differently, of course. I have no strong opinion on this, so up to you to decide.

@AlexD10S some minor detail regarding this development:

The output, as you can see, is not purely the resulting address (meaning that it contains the formatting sugar of the cli.success function). For this very particular case (and hashing, since we are on it) in my opinion the output should be totally clean, similar to the result of an standard println! statement. Otherwise, results cannot be piped, hence making life harder when integrating pop-cli in shell scripts.

I didn't do it here, as I wanted to respect the similar development for hashing, but it might be worth creating an issue so that this does not get forgotten.

I didn't do it here, as I wanted to respect the similar development for hashing, but it might be worth creating an issue so that this does not get forgotten.

Good point, it makes sense to keep the println! for the output as you suggested. Feel free to go ahead and create the issue.

Another option would be to move the address conversion method into the pop-common crate and expose it, so that third-party applications integrating with our crates can also reuse it.

Good point, it makes sense to keep the println! for the output as you suggested. Feel free to go ahead and create the issue.

@AlexD10S done, see #601.

Another option would be to move the address conversion method into the pop-common crate and expose it, so that third-party applications integrating with our crates can also reuse it.

Absolutely! Moving utility stuff to a library seems like a very good idea.

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 85.22727% with 13 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.08%. Comparing base (607512e) to head (49ff1a8).
⚠️ Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #592      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   79.36%   77.08%   -2.29%     
==========================================
  Files         106      109       +3     
  Lines       25979    24854    -1125     
  Branches    25979    24854    -1125     
==========================================
- Hits        20619    19158    -1461     
- Misses       3073     3697     +624     
+ Partials     2287     1999     -288     

... and 27 files with indirect coverage changes