89a8299a14
fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke) fa32c1d5ec25bc53bf989a8ae68e688593d2859d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke) faaa46dc204d6d714f71dbc6f0bf02215dba0f0f rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke) fa93bc14c7411a108dd024d391344fabf0f76369 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (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: fjahr: tested ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed promag: Code review ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed. Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is an experimental digital currency that enables instant payments to anyone, anywhere in the world. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority: managing transactions and issuing money are carried out collectively by the network. Bitcoin Core is the name of open source software which enables the use of this currency.
For more information, as well as an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/, or read the original whitepaper.
License
Bitcoin Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/licenses/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 in configure) with: make check. 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, that are run automatically on the build server.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: test/functional/test_runner.py
The Travis CI system makes sure that every pull request is built for Windows, Linux, and macOS, and that unit/sanity tests are run automatically.
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.
Translators should also subscribe to the mailing list.