1473f69924
4ef6253017test: avoid unneeded (w)txid hex -> integer conversions (Sebastian Falbesoner)472f3770aescripted-diff: test: rename CTransaction `.getwtxid()` -> `wtxid_hex` for consistency (Sebastian Falbesoner)81af4334e8test: rename CTransaction `.sha256` -> `.txid_int` for consistency (Sebastian Falbesoner)ce83924237test: rename CTransaction `.rehash()`/`.hash` -> `.txid_hex` for consistency (Sebastian Falbesoner)e9cdaefb0atest: introduce and use CTransaction `.wtxid_int` property (Sebastian Falbesoner)9b3dce24a3test: remove bare CTransaction `.rehash()`/`.calc_sha256()` calls (Sebastian Falbesoner)a2724e3ea3test: remove txid caching in CTransaction class (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: In the functional test framework, determining a (w)txid for a `CTransaction` instance is currently rather confusing and footgunny due to inconsistent naming/interfaces (see table below) and statefulness involved. This PR aims to improve that by: * removing the (w)txid caching mechanism, in order to avoid the need to call additional rehashing functions (`.rehash()`/`.calculate_sha256()`, see first two commits and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32050#discussion_r1993286997). This change in theory decreases the performance, as the involved serialization and hashing involved might be called more often than previously, but I couldn't find a functional test where this leads to a measurable run-time increase on my machine. * introduce consistent naming that shows the type of the returned txid, i.e. hex string vs. test-framework-internal representation [currently integers] (see remaining commits) Summary table showing (w)txid determaination before/after this PR: | Task | master | PR | |:-----------------------|:-----------------------|:-------------| | get TXID (hex string) | `.rehash()` / `.hash`[1] | `.txid_hex` | | get TXID (integer) | `.sha256`[1] | `.txid_int` | | get WTXID (hex string) | `.getwtxid()` | `.wtxid_hex` | | get WTXID (integer) | `.calc_sha256(True)` | `.wtxid_int` | Unfortunately, most renames can't be done with a scripted-diff, as the property names (`.hash`, `.sha256`) are also used for blocks and other message types. The PR is rather invasive and touches a lot of files, but I think it's worth to do it, also to make life easier for new contributors. Future tasks like e.g. doing the same overhaul for block (header) objects or getting rid of the integer representation (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32050) become easier should become easier after this one. [1] = returned value might be out-of-date, if rehashing function wasn't called after modification ACKs for top commit: maflcko: re-ACK4ef6253017🏈 achow101: ACK4ef6253017marcofleon: code review ACK4ef6253017Tree-SHA512: 4b472c31d169966b6f6878911a8404d25bf3e503b6e8ef30f36a7415d21ad4bc1265083af2d3ead6edfcd9fac9ccb0a8be57e1b0739ad431b836413070d7d583
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
For an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.
What is Bitcoin Core?
Bitcoin Core connects to the Bitcoin peer-to-peer network to download and fully validate blocks and transactions. It also includes a wallet and graphical user interface, which can be optionally built.
Further information about Bitcoin Core is available in the doc folder.
License
Bitcoin Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/license/MIT.
Development Process
The master branch is regularly built (see doc/build-*.md for instructions) and tested, but it is not guaranteed to be
completely stable. Tags are created
regularly from release branches to indicate new official, stable release versions of Bitcoin Core.
The https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui repository is used exclusively for the development of the GUI. Its master branch is identical in all monotree repositories. Release branches and tags do not exist, so please do not fork that repository unless it is for development reasons.
The contribution workflow is described in CONTRIBUTING.md and useful hints for developers can be found in doc/developer-notes.md.
Testing
Testing and code review is the bottleneck for development; we get more pull requests than we can review and test on short notice. Please be patient and help out by testing other people's pull requests, and remember this is a security-critical project where any mistake might cost people lots of money.
Automated Testing
Developers are strongly encouraged to write unit tests for new code, and to
submit new unit tests for old code. Unit tests can be compiled and run
(assuming they weren't disabled during the generation of the build system) with: ctest. Further details on running
and extending unit tests can be found in /src/test/README.md.
There are also regression and integration tests, written
in Python.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: build/test/functional/test_runner.py
(assuming build is your build directory).
The CI (Continuous Integration) systems make sure that every pull request is tested on Windows, Linux, and macOS. The CI must pass on all commits before merge to avoid unrelated CI failures on new pull requests.
Manual Quality Assurance (QA) Testing
Changes should be tested by somebody other than the developer who wrote the code. This is especially important for large or high-risk changes. It is useful to add a test plan to the pull request description if testing the changes is not straightforward.
Translations
Changes to translations as well as new translations can be submitted to Bitcoin Core's Transifex page.
Translations are periodically pulled from Transifex and merged into the git repository. See the translation process for details on how this works.
Important: We do not accept translation changes as GitHub pull requests because the next pull from Transifex would automatically overwrite them again.