The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage

For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

Spend.cpp coverage is not too bad already: https://maflcko.github.io/b-c-cov/fuzz.coverage/src/wallet/spend.cpp.gcov.html

It may be good to clarify the new coverage a bit.

I think fuzzing it directly is good and there are some CoinsResult functions that are not fuzzed (All, Erase, Clear), but tbh just noticed they're used only in unit test, so the only benefit would be the performance of fuzzing it directly. I'm ok on closing it if case.

Not sure what the point here is. All functions are trivial for-loops, and already fuzzed.

The only function that isn't CoinsResult::Erase is unused outside of tests, so I don't see why CPU, storage, code, review, maintenance, etc should be spent on this.

It may be better to remove the function or move it to the tests?

It may be better to remove the function or move it to the tests?

Probably move it to the tests. Anyway, I'll close this for now.