[rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB #8153

maflcko · 2016-06-06T18:12:12Z

No description provided.

luke-jr · 2016-06-06T18:17:24Z

Should actually be BTC (or satoshis?) per byte, since we no longer do it per kB...

sipa · 2016-06-06T18:18:39Z

All RPC arguments use BTC/kByte, no?

jonasschnelli · 2016-06-06T18:19:36Z

It should be the same format than bitcoind spit out when one calls estimatefee.

maflcko · 2016-06-06T19:51:20Z

@jonasschnelli et al: Added a commit so I don't have to modify the univalue subtree. (Added a UniValueType wrapper instead)

fanquake · 2016-06-07T02:27:05Z

qa/rpc-tests/fundrawtransaction.py

nit s/sat/set

it is probably satoshis. But not very clear, yes.

Thanks, will fix the comment.

laanwj · 2016-06-07T06:46:53Z

BTC/kB is fine, we use that for fee rates on the interface everywhere. The point of this change is to reduce the variety of different ways in which the same is expressed on the interface, not come up with something new.

utACK faf82e8

maflcko · 2016-06-07T07:05:57Z

I think @luke-jr was referring to kB no longer being the smallest unit. Currently we use Byte to be the smallest unit.

laanwj · 2016-06-07T07:14:34Z

src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp

Looks muc hbetter in c++11 syntax

maflcko · 2016-06-07T07:17:34Z

(Force pushed after fixing comment-nit)

jonasschnelli · 2016-06-07T09:11:23Z

Not sure if I got this right, but why not just removing the "feeRate" from the RPCTypeCheckObj check (it's optional anyways)? I don't see the reason for the new UniValueType type.

maflcko · 2016-06-07T09:27:45Z

We also want to suppress passing in unrecognized parameters. (Try removing it and see where the rpc tests fail. Hint: fStrict is set to true)

jonasschnelli · 2016-06-07T09:32:32Z

Ah. Right. Makes sense.
Is there no way to avoid the UniValueType wrapper? Using UniValue::VNULL for a type-independent check? Or would a C++11 union be simpler?

sipa · 2016-06-07T09:38:40Z

src/rpc/server.h

typedef is not needed for structs and classes in C++.

Fixed.

Also changed to union as suggested by @jonasschnelli

jonasschnelli · 2016-06-07T10:55:14Z

Nice!
utACK fa51551b7f5c2dbfae01f5cee8ee8251868609e2

sipa · 2016-06-07T11:02:53Z

src/rpc/server.cpp

This is not valid. You can only access fields of a union that you know was the last one assigned to. Testing both typeAny and type certains violates that property at least once.

Right, I should probably just do s/union/struct/ to revert to struct.

I agree. It's very easy to violate the requirements of using an union accidentally, resulting in horrible hard to debug issues, I'd prefer not using them unless it's a place where the additional memory usage is critical. I don't think that's the case here.

done. Hope I got it right this time. 👍

Also introduce UniValueType UniValueType is a wrapper for UniValue::VType which allows setting a typeAny flag. This flag indicates the type does not matter. (Used by RPCTypeCheckObj)

laanwj · 2016-06-07T12:22:05Z

src/wallet/rpcwallet.cpp


        if (options.exists("feeRate"))
        {
-            feeRate = CFeeRate(options["feeRate"].get_real());


We slipped up with the review for #7967, shouldn't have allowed using get_real here. Good that this is being replaced.

On the other hand, imagine if someone noticed it while reviewing #7967: The pull probably would have never made it into 0.13 before feature freeze, because adding the anytype is a non-trivial refactor and review is hard to do when there is substantial refactoring going on while adding new features.

Looking at it from this perspective, it makes sense to have two pulls to aid review.

fa7f4f5 [rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB (MarcoFalke) faf82e8 [rpc] fundrawtransaction: Fix help text and interface (MarcoFalke)

laanwj · 2016-06-08T12:15:19Z

utACK fa7f4f5

fa7f4f5 [rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB (MarcoFalke) faf82e8 [rpc] fundrawtransaction: Fix help text and interface (MarcoFalke)

[rpc] fundrawtransaction: Fix help text and interface

faf82e8

maflcko added the RPC/REST/ZMQ label Jun 6, 2016

maflcko mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2016

[rpc] fundrawtransaction: Fix help text #8144

Merged

fanquake reviewed Jun 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

maflcko force-pushed the Mf1606-univalAny branch from a9a64df to 7817d3f Compare June 7, 2016 07:03

laanwj reviewed Jun 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp Outdated

Copy link

Member

laanwj Jun 7, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks muc hbetter in c++11 syntax

maflcko force-pushed the Mf1606-univalAny branch from 7817d3f to fab3629 Compare June 7, 2016 07:16

sipa reviewed Jun 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

maflcko force-pushed the Mf1606-univalAny branch from fab3629 to fa51551 Compare June 7, 2016 09:59

sipa reviewed Jun 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

[rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB

fa7f4f5

Also introduce UniValueType UniValueType is a wrapper for UniValue::VType which allows setting a typeAny flag. This flag indicates the type does not matter. (Used by RPCTypeCheckObj)

maflcko force-pushed the Mf1606-univalAny branch from fa51551 to fa7f4f5 Compare June 7, 2016 11:13

laanwj reviewed Jun 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

laanwj merged commit fa7f4f5 into bitcoin:master Jun 8, 2016

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2016

Merge #8153: [rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB

75ec320

fa7f4f5 [rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB (MarcoFalke) faf82e8 [rpc] fundrawtransaction: Fix help text and interface (MarcoFalke)

laanwj mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2016

TODO for release notes 0.13.0 #7678

Closed

16 tasks

maflcko deleted the Mf1606-univalAny branch June 8, 2016 12:18

dagurval mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2018

fundrawtransaction cherries bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt#320

Merged

bitcoin locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 8, 2021

[rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB #8153

[rpc] fundrawtransaction feeRate: Use BTC/kB #8153

Uh oh!

Conversation

maflcko commented Jun 6, 2016

Uh oh!

luke-jr commented Jun 6, 2016

Uh oh!

sipa commented Jun 6, 2016

Uh oh!

jonasschnelli commented Jun 6, 2016

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Jun 6, 2016

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

laanwj commented Jun 7, 2016 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

jonasschnelli commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

jonasschnelli commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jonasschnelli commented Jun 7, 2016

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

laanwj commented Jun 8, 2016

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

laanwj commented Jun 7, 2016 •

edited

Loading