Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Various corrections to developer reference #1611
Conversation
achow101
added some commits
May 22, 2017
wbnns
self-assigned this
May 23, 2017
|
@achow101 in and of themselves, these changes LGTM. I was wondering if you checked the implementation behavior to confirm all of those issues were accurate? (I'm not saying you have to, I don't know what @wbnns's bounty rules are, but I usually like to confirm the problems before editing the docs.) In particularly, I'm surprised by #1520 (rescan) as I don't think I would've added the extra sentence there unless I believed it was true based on my reading of the code or my testing (though it's possible the implementation has changed since I wrote it, or that I was wrong when I wrote it, or that I'm wrong now in guessing at my mental state 2.5 years ago when I wrote it). Also #1365 (compactSize canonical encoding) has a link to a Bitcoin Core dev saying that the sizes weren't previously enforced, suggesting to me that there may be some subtleties in the behavior or maybe that this was even an unknown soft fork. |
wbnns
added
the
Merge Scheduled
label
May 23, 2017
|
I did verify the behavior and checked in the code. For the rescan functionality, it looks like the behavior did change with this commit bitcoin/bitcoin@983d2d9 so it no longer did nothing if the address/script already existed. For the CompactSize uint encoding, that behavior changed with this commit: bitcoin/bitcoin@8dc206a to enforce canonical encoding. |
|
@achow101 awesome! Thanks! |
wbnns
merged commit bdbe5da
into
bitcoin-dot-org:master
May 26, 2017
1 check passed
|
importaddress |
achow101 commentedMay 22, 2017
Corrected Compact Size Unsigned Integer description to include the lower bounds.
Changed reject message code descriptions of the extra data field to be more accurate as the extra data is not always what was specified nor is the field required.
Clarified the empty message headers are allowed.
Removed incorrect note in importaddress which stated that addresses would not be rescanned if already in the wallet. They are rescanned.
Closes #1505, #1365, #1604, #1520
If this is accepted, please pay the bounty to 1AjFwHanPewurVms4Z3ExtapHmKWF6aTVS