rpc: Fix named arguments in documentation#18607
Merged
maflcko merged 3 commits intobitcoin:masterfrom Apr 17, 2020
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ConflictsNo conflicts as of last run. |
pierreN
approved these changes
Apr 15, 2020
Contributor
pierreN
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For what it's worth, tested ACK.
I just left 2 comments below if I were to be extremely picky.
Member
Author
|
Addressed feedback by @pierreN |
Member
Author
|
And thanks for testing @pierreN . If you want to get included in the merge commit message with your ACK, you can write Tested ACK ${commit_hash_of_the_commit_you_tested} ${optional_description_of_how and_what_you_tested} |
Contributor
|
Thanks! Tested ACK fa168d7 tests, help messages |
Member
Author
|
Rendered diff for reference: $ git diff --ignore-all-space
diff --git a/generateblock b/generateblock
index 5586a32..55aca89 100644
--- a/generateblock
+++ b/generateblock
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-generateblock "address/descriptor" ["rawtx/txid",...]
+generateblock "output" ["rawtx/txid",...]
Mine a block with a set of ordered transactions immediately to a specified address or descriptor (before the RPC call returns)
Arguments:
-1. address/descriptor (string, required) The address or descriptor to send the newly generated bitcoin to.
+1. output (string, required) The address or descriptor to send the newly generated bitcoin to.
2. transactions (json array, required) An array of hex strings which are either txids or raw transactions.
Txids must reference transactions currently in the mempool.
All transactions must be valid and in valid order, otherwise the block will be rejected. |
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2020
fa168d7 rpc: Document all aliases for first arg of listtransactions (MarcoFalke) fa5b1f0 rpc: Document all aliases for second arg of getblock (MarcoFalke) fa86a4b rpc: Rename first arg of generateblock RPC to "output" (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This fixes a bug found with bitcoin#18531: * Currently the named argument for `generateblock` is documented as `address/descriptor`, but the server only accepts a named argument of `address`. Fix it by changing the name to `output` for both the documentation and the server code. Also, add tests to prove the server understands the new name `output`. * Unrelated to that, there have been a bunch of aliases in the server code that are not present in the source code of the documentation. Fix that by adding the alias to the source code of the documentation. Only the first alias is displayed in the rendered documentation. Also, add tests to prove the server actually understands all aliases. ACKs for top commit: pierreN: Tested ACK fa168d7 tests, help messages Tree-SHA512: 05e15628e3a667b296f3783d20f764b450b959451b5360c7eaf5993156582d47a0f5882330ca2493b851eb46324d504953b90c875bc88a15c9e8c89eb3ef8d92
maflcko
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2020
…ones (server) fa7592b rpc: Update server to use new RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) aaaaad5 rpc: Add option to hide RPCArg (MarcoFalke) fa9708f rpc: Assert that passed arg names are equal to hardcoded ones (MarcoFalke) faaeb2b rpc: Add CRPCCommand constructor which takes RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) fa8ec00 rpc: Check that left section is not multiline (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in server. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue #18607 * The changes itself fixed bug #19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: ACK fa7592b ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa7592b. Looks great! Just some hidden arg and Check() and comment cleanups since last review Tree-SHA512: e64b6a212f4a3aeedeee47557559bde104d5fd40cdc1746b27eb2f3d4c8885d5e6e4dd287595ea11cdbc6a939654fe103cae765fd505875444d851f0abb11308
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 16, 2020
…ommand ones (server) fa7592b rpc: Update server to use new RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) aaaaad5 rpc: Add option to hide RPCArg (MarcoFalke) fa9708f rpc: Assert that passed arg names are equal to hardcoded ones (MarcoFalke) faaeb2b rpc: Add CRPCCommand constructor which takes RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) fa8ec00 rpc: Check that left section is not multiline (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in server. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: ACK fa7592b ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa7592b. Looks great! Just some hidden arg and Check() and comment cleanups since last review Tree-SHA512: e64b6a212f4a3aeedeee47557559bde104d5fd40cdc1746b27eb2f3d4c8885d5e6e4dd287595ea11cdbc6a939654fe103cae765fd505875444d851f0abb11308
maflcko
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2020
…ones (misc) fa77de2 rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke) fa50bdc rpc: Limit echo to 10 args (MarcoFalke) fa89ca9 refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code (MarcoFalke) fa459bd rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue #18607 * The changes itself fixed bug #19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: Code review ACK fa77de2 fjahr: tested ACK fa77de2 theStack: ACK fa77de2 ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa77de2. Pretty straightfoward changes Tree-SHA512: badae1606518c0b55ce2c0bb9025d14f05556532375eb20fd6f3bfadae1e5e6568860bff8599d037e655bf1d23f1f464ca17f4db10a6ab3d502b6e9e61c7b3d3
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 16, 2020
…ommand ones (misc) fa77de2 rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke) fa50bdc rpc: Limit echo to 10 args (MarcoFalke) fa89ca9 refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code (MarcoFalke) fa459bd rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: Code review ACK fa77de2 fjahr: tested ACK fa77de2 theStack: ACK bitcoin@fa77de2 ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa77de2. Pretty straightfoward changes Tree-SHA512: badae1606518c0b55ce2c0bb9025d14f05556532375eb20fd6f3bfadae1e5e6568860bff8599d037e655bf1d23f1f464ca17f4db10a6ab3d502b6e9e61c7b3d3
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 16, 2020
…ommand ones (server) fa7592b rpc: Update server to use new RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) aaaaad5 rpc: Add option to hide RPCArg (MarcoFalke) fa9708f rpc: Assert that passed arg names are equal to hardcoded ones (MarcoFalke) faaeb2b rpc: Add CRPCCommand constructor which takes RPCHelpMan (MarcoFalke) fa8ec00 rpc: Check that left section is not multiline (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in server. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: ACK fa7592b ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa7592b. Looks great! Just some hidden arg and Check() and comment cleanups since last review Tree-SHA512: e64b6a212f4a3aeedeee47557559bde104d5fd40cdc1746b27eb2f3d4c8885d5e6e4dd287595ea11cdbc6a939654fe103cae765fd505875444d851f0abb11308
maflcko
pushed a commit
to maflcko/bitcoin-core
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 31, 2020
…ommand ones (mining,zmq,rpcdump) fa3d9ce rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke) fa32c1d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke) faaa46d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke) fa93bc1 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK fa3d9ce promag: Code review ACK fa3d9ce. Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 31, 2020
…ommand ones (mining,zmq,rpcdump) fa3d9ce rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke) fa32c1d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke) faaa46d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke) fa93bc1 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK fa3d9ce promag: Code review ACK fa3d9ce. Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
maflcko
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2020
…(blockchain,rawtransaction) fa6bb0c Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke) fa80c81 Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain) (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from #18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue #18607 * The changes itself fixed bug #19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: utACK fa6bb0c tryphe: utACK fa6bb0c. Reducing data duplication is nice. Code changes are minimal and concise. Tree-SHA512: deb0edc3f999baf055526eaa199b98c500635e12502dece7aa3cad5319db330eb5ee7459a5c8f040a83671a7f20c560c19a2026fb76c8416f138aa332727cbce
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2020
…d ones (blockchain,rawtransaction) fa6bb0c Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke) fa80c81 Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain) (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: utACK fa6bb0c tryphe: utACK fa6bb0c. Reducing data duplication is nice. Code changes are minimal and concise. Tree-SHA512: deb0edc3f999baf055526eaa199b98c500635e12502dece7aa3cad5319db330eb5ee7459a5c8f040a83671a7f20c560c19a2026fb76c8416f138aa332727cbce
maflcko
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2020
…(net, rpcwallet) fa14f57 Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is the last part split out from #18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue #18607 * The changes itself fixed bug #19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tACK fa14f57 ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa14f57. Just straightforward replacements except code moved in `addnode`, and displatching updated in `bumpfee_helper` Tree-SHA512: e07af150f1d95a88e558256ce197a6b7dc6cd722a6d6c13c75d944c49c2e2441f8b8237e9f94b03db69fa18f9bda627b0781d5e1da70bf5415e09b38728a8cb1
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2020
…d ones (net, rpcwallet) fa14f57 Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is the last part split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tACK fa14f57 ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa14f57. Just straightforward replacements except code moved in `addnode`, and displatching updated in `bumpfee_helper` Tree-SHA512: e07af150f1d95a88e558256ce197a6b7dc6cd722a6d6c13c75d944c49c2e2441f8b8237e9f94b03db69fa18f9bda627b0781d5e1da70bf5415e09b38728a8cb1
maflcko
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 19, 2020
faaf9c5 remove CRPCCommand constructor that takes rpcfn_type function pointer (MarcoFalke) fa19bb2 remove dead rpc code (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: Remove the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue #18607 * The changes itself fixed bug #19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK faaf9c5 promag: Tested ACK faaf9c5. ryanofsky: Code review ACK faaf9c5. Two obviously good simplifications. Tree-SHA512: 5de3b440f7b2ed2c3e86655d4f0e2e5df9c67e8ce3c7817d5ea5311d1a38690f2f3e28fab41aad6936be9fc884326d037e5f19e85d4d2fe281474dada13911ee
sidhujag
pushed a commit
to syscoin/syscoin
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 19, 2020
faaf9c5 remove CRPCCommand constructor that takes rpcfn_type function pointer (MarcoFalke) fa19bb2 remove dead rpc code (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: Remove the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK faaf9c5 promag: Tested ACK faaf9c5. ryanofsky: Code review ACK faaf9c5. Two obviously good simplifications. Tree-SHA512: 5de3b440f7b2ed2c3e86655d4f0e2e5df9c67e8ce3c7817d5ea5311d1a38690f2f3e28fab41aad6936be9fc884326d037e5f19e85d4d2fe281474dada13911ee
jasonbcox
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2020
Summary:
```
This fixes a bug found with #18531:
Currently the named argument for generateblock is documented as
address/descriptor, but the server only accepts a named argument of
address. Fix it by changing the name to output for both the
documentation and the server code. Also, add tests to prove the server
understands the new name output.
Unrelated to that, there have been a bunch of aliases in the server
code that are not present in the source code of the documentation. Fix
that by adding the alias to the source code of the documentation. Only
the first alias is displayed in the rendered documentation. Also, add
tests to prove the server actually understands all aliases.
```
Backport of core [[bitcoin/bitcoin#18607 | PR18607]].
Depends on D8567.
Test Plan:
ninja all check-all
Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, deadalnix
Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, deadalnix
Subscribers: deadalnix
Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D8568
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes a bug found with #18531:
Currently the named argument for
generateblockis documented asaddress/descriptor, but the server only accepts a named argument ofaddress. Fix it by changing the name tooutputfor both the documentation and the server code. Also, add tests to prove the server understands the new nameoutput.Unrelated to that, there have been a bunch of aliases in the server code that are not present in the source code of the documentation. Fix that by adding the alias to the source code of the documentation. Only the first alias is displayed in the rendered documentation. Also, add tests to prove the server actually understands all aliases.