rest: Do not re-use the function name ParseHashStr (core_io.h) for a function with different behaviour in rest.cpp #14288

Do not re-use the function name ParseHashStr (core_io.h) for a function with different behaviour in rest.cpp.

Before:

src/core_io.h:uint256 ParseHashStr(const std::string&, const std::string& strName);
src/core_read.cpp:uint256 ParseHashStr(const std::string& strHex, const std::string& strName)
src/rest.cpp:static bool ParseHashStr(const std::string& strReq, uint256& v)

After:

src/core_io.h:uint256 ParseHashStr(const std::string&, const std::string& strName);
src/core_read.cpp:uint256 ParseHashStr(const std::string& strHex, const std::string& strName)

Reminds me of "Drop ParseHashUV in favor of calling ParseHashStr" #13422 by @Empact

<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->Note to reviewers: This pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #13815 (util: Add [[nodiscard]] to all {Decode,Parse}... functions returning bool by practicalswift)

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

I don't mind the change, but also don't mind keeping it as it is. :) I suspect either way is fine.

Couldn't you remove this function and just call ParseHashStr?

@MarcoFalke Yes, but I don't want to change any behaviour and the functions are not identical. ParseHashStr throws std::runtime_error in case of non-hex input which ParseHexHashStr does not. Also note the length requirement of ParseHexHashStr.

uint256 ParseHashStr(const std::string& strHex, const std::string& strName)
{
    if (!IsHex(strHex)) // Note: IsHex("") is false
        throw std::runtime_error(strName + " must be hexadecimal string (not '" + strHex + "')");

    uint256 result;
    result.SetHex(strHex);
    return result;
}

// Suggested new function name: ParseHexHashStr
static bool ParseHashStr(const std::string& strReq, uint256& v)
{
    if (!IsHex(strReq) || (strReq.size() != 64))
        return false;

    v.SetHex(strReq);
    return true;
}

Closing in favour of #14307 which fixes this issue more elegantly :-)