txgraph: drop move assignment operator #33862

1. 
   sipa commented at 4:25 pm on November 12, 2025: member

   This removes the only place where move-assignment of TxGraph::Ref is used (in tests), and drops supports for it.

   Suggested in #33629 (review)

2. 
   DrahtBot commented at 4:25 pm on November 12, 2025: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33862.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	l0rinc, instagibbs
   Stale ACK	ajtowns

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <!–meta-tag:bot-skip–> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

3. 
   sipa commented at 4:25 pm on November 12, 2025: member

   cc @ajtowns
4. glozow added the label Refactoring on Nov 12, 2025
5. glozow added the label Mempool on Nov 12, 2025
6. in src/txgraph.cpp:3454 in aef40b93cf outdated

   3463-    other.m_graph = nullptr;
   3464-    other.m_index = GraphIndex(-1);
   3465-    return *this;
   3466-}
   3467-
   3468 TxGraph::Ref::Ref(Ref&& other) noexcept
   

   ---

   ---

   

   l0rinc commented at 5:33 pm on November 12, 2025:

   This seems used to me, but https://storage.googleapis.com/oss-fuzz-coverage/bitcoin-core/reports/20251112/linux/src/bitcoin-core/src/txgraph.cpp.html#L3469 seems confused by it.
7. l0rinc approved
8. 
   l0rinc commented at 5:35 pm on November 12, 2025: contributor

   code review ACK aef40b93cf057d2a27d61881b0858d491206bcd3

   Simplifies the public interface of TxGraph by deleting the move assignment operator only used in tests. The usage seems correct as it is currently, but left a question about the move-constructor which the fuzzers seem to be confused about.

9. 
   instagibbs commented at 5:40 pm on November 12, 2025: member

   link to discussion, I think #33629 (review)
10. 
    ajtowns commented at 11:32 am on November 13, 2025: contributor

    ACK aef40b93cf057d2a27d61881b0858d491206bcd3 – matches what I was thinking

    Adding some assertions in Ref::Ref(Ref&&) triggers when I run the fuzz binary over some txgraph corpus data I generated previously, so #33862 (review) doesn’t seem like a real problem.

11. 
    fanquake commented at 12:16 pm on November 25, 2025: member

    Please rebase this.
12. txgraph: drop move assignment operator ade0397f59
13. sipa force-pushed on Nov 25, 2025
14. 
    sipa commented at 12:37 pm on November 25, 2025: member

    Rebased after merge of #33629.
15. 
    l0rinc commented at 12:48 pm on November 25, 2025: contributor

    reACK ade0397f59f2fb59ab0e4ebb39869ac343cc54ee

    Redid the rebase (no conflicts, how come rebase was needed?) and soft reset against PR, no changed. Verifired the same with git range-diff aef40b93cf057d2a27d61881b0858d491206bcd3...ade0397f59f2fb59ab0e4ebb39869ac343cc54ee

16. DrahtBot requested review from ajtowns on Nov 25, 2025
17. 
    instagibbs commented at 3:43 pm on November 25, 2025: member

    ACK ade0397f59f2fb59ab0e4ebb39869ac343cc54ee
18. fanquake merged this on Nov 25, 2025
19. fanquake closed this on Nov 25, 2025

    ---

Contributors
sipa DrahtBot l0rinc instagibbs ajtowns fanquake

Review Requested
ajtowns

Labels
Refactoring Mempool