See Issue [#1149](/bitcoin-bitcoin/1149/)
Example ouput:
[
{
"address" : "1...",
"account" : "",
"amount" : 0.1,
"confirmations" : 9000,
"txids" : [
"5b68f4799e90e5d04f0c67fa9a2971e0964ced225a31f548e3ede8f4a0fc5836",
"e132bb64a1a61c2d34163261d9c5bc2b166dc3a476e922dc1bd2d02a325b086b"
]
}
]
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).
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?
Still needs a test plan; see https://github.com/bitcoin/QA for how to write one.
Automatic sanity-testing: PASSED, see http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/1a20469428ef623f4edc2cdac72aef001836536c for binaries and test log.
@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)?
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.
This txids will grow indefinitely... not sure it's a good idea.
