listreceivedbyaddress now provides tx ids (issue #1149) #2104

pull al42and wants to merge 2 commits into bitcoin:master from al42and:listreceivedbyaddress_txids changing 2 files +41 −8
  1. al42and commented at 3:05 PM on December 13, 2012: contributor

    See Issue [#1149](/bitcoin-bitcoin/1149/)

    Example ouput:

    [
    {
    "address" : "1...",
    "account" : "",
    "amount" : 0.1,
    "confirmations" : 9000,
    "txids" : [
    "5b68f4799e90e5d04f0c67fa9a2971e0964ced225a31f548e3ede8f4a0fc5836",
    "e132bb64a1a61c2d34163261d9c5bc2b166dc3a476e922dc1bd2d02a325b086b"
    ]
    }
    ]
    
  2. listreceivedbyaddress now provides tx ids (issue #1149) 62c9b1155f
  3. gavinandresen commented at 5:17 PM on December 13, 2012: contributor

    Please add 'txids' to the lisreceivedbyaddress help text, and can you write up a little test plan for how this should be tested? (e.g. expected results passing the 'minconf' param, if includeempty=true do you get [] for "txids" (preferred) or is that field just missing, etc).

  4. al42and commented at 1:01 PM on December 15, 2012: contributor

    Okay, no problem with help text, but I'm slightly unsure about tests: currently, for example, adding following tests to rpc_rawparams routine:

        BOOST_CHECK_NO_THROW(r=CallRPC("listreceivedbyaddress"));
        BOOST_CHECK(r.get_array().empty());
    

    does not result in failed test, though, of course, it depends on wallet state.

    Should I just add tests for correct handling of parameter types (like is done for getrawtransaction and some other RPC functions), or can I rely on wallet having some predefined state during tests?

  5. Updated help and tests for getreceivedby(account|address) 1a20469428
  6. gavinandresen commented at 3:12 PM on January 23, 2013: contributor

    Still needs a test plan; see https://github.com/bitcoin/QA for how to write one.

  7. BitcoinPullTester commented at 6:39 AM on January 24, 2013: none

    Automatic sanity-testing: PASSED, see http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/1a20469428ef623f4edc2cdac72aef001836536c for binaries and test log.

  8. al42and commented at 6:30 PM on January 24, 2013: contributor

    @gavinandresen What is the preferred way to create test protocol for RPC calls? For most users the easiest way, in mu opinion, would be to use Debug window in Bitcoin-Qt. Or is it better to create some script (in e.g. Python) which does all necessary calls via network (purely automatically or may be interactively)?

  9. gavinandresen commented at 8:15 PM on January 24, 2013: contributor

    I think it would probably be best to give testers a script to follow. Install THIS executable, then run it like THIS, then open the Debug window and execute the following RPC commands: ....

    If you write a Python script to try to test this, a bug in THAT code might hide a bug in your code. And testers often notice things that you didn't as they are testing.

  10. luke-jr commented at 5:16 PM on January 30, 2013: member

    This txids will grow indefinitely... not sure it's a good idea.

  11. sipa commented at 6:23 PM on April 7, 2013: member

    ACK. @luke-jr They shouldn't, as address reuse is discouraged. If you know you are reusing addresses, you're taking the performance penalty here too.

  12. jgarzik referenced this in commit 9d01dd7658 on May 30, 2013
  13. jgarzik merged this on May 30, 2013
  14. jgarzik closed this on May 30, 2013

  15. HashUnlimited referenced this in commit 6b8b88aea7 on Jun 11, 2018
  16. sidhujag referenced this in commit 0076d47dcf on Jul 6, 2018
  17. DrahtBot locked this on Sep 8, 2021

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bitcoin. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2026-04-29 03:16 UTC

This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me