backport: Merge bitcoin#27151, 25849 - #7427
Conversation
e846269 util: Remove duplicate include (Andrew Chow) Pull request description: Duplicate `#include <utility>` is upsetting the linter. ACKs for top commit: davidgumberg: ACK bitcoin@e846269 theStack: ACK e846269 john-moffett: ACK e846269 Tree-SHA512: 9e45d8f6a2dd5efcb8eb1c3c440d94b16490dbd63255784cb39863767fa07227e06da112a150ef337ef89e2e305b60b00d5b1c12ff7e1e9c02f6648ed97fac8c
…tring fac09f4 refactor: Remove not needed empty RPC doc std::string (MacroFake) Pull request description: Not sure why this was put there, so remove it ACKs for top commit: aureleoules: ACK fac09f4. Tree-SHA512: 7fae9c612dbb82db39e3dc6e20cc7d0c8128f4abf27e34f4854f908dc1bf3ad48ebee2dbbb864a9ce95e98c5d57119bf976793945a2084a43d137c2d95a25ea1
|
✅ Review complete (commit 9b02773) |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
WalkthroughThis change reorders a header include before a conditional compilation block in lockedpool.cpp with no functional impact. Separately, it reformats the construction of the estimate_mode help text string across five wallet RPC methods (sendtoaddress, sendmany, FundTxDoc, send, sendall), removing a std::string() concatenation prefix and adjusting indentation, without altering argument types, defaults, or displayed content. Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
thepastaclaw
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
Source: reviewers: codex-general, codex-dash-core-commit-history, codex-backport-reviewer on gpt-5.5; Claude/Opus reviewer lanes failed due usage quota. Verifier: codex on gpt-5.5.
Verified exact head 9b02773df92dc0952dcb8f120da3cd0e132f1d4e against the two-commit PR diff. The changes are limited to moving the duplicate <utility> include in lockedpool.cpp and removing unnecessary empty std::string() prefixes from wallet RPC help strings; the resulting string concatenation remains valid and matches existing patterns. The backport and commit-history specialist lanes found no in-scope issues, and CodeRabbit had no actionable inline findings.
|
CI note: I diagnosed the red The first real failure is an existing parallel-build race in the Dash BLS/relic setup, not a problem introduced by this backport: The actual PR diff is limited to the |
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Replacement for #7128.
This backports two small Bitcoin Core cleanups:
<utility>include fromsrc/support/lockedpool.cppstd::string() +prefixes from wallet RPC fee-estimate help stringsThe original PR had stale review feedback because the bitcoin#27151 cherry-pick removed Dash's only direct
<utility>include after prior backports had already diverged, and the bitcoin#25849 cherry-pick missed two Dash wallet RPC callsites. This replacement branch is rebuilt on currentdevelopand folds those fixes into the corresponding backport commits.What was done?
upstream/develop.src/support/lockedpool.cppwith one direct<utility>include while removing the duplicate.sendtoaddress,sendmany,FundTxDoc,send, andsendall.How Has This Been Tested?
Local validation on macOS:
git diff --check upstream/develop...HEADCOMMIT_RANGE=upstream/develop..HEAD test/lint/lint-whitespace.pypython3 test/lint/lint-includes.py./autogen.sh./configure --without-gui --disable-bench --disable-fuzz-binary --without-miniupnpc --without-natpmpmake -C src support/libbitcoin_util_a-lockedpool.o wallet/rpc/libbitcoin_wallet_a-spend.o -j4make -C src dashd test/test_dash -j4src/test/test_dash --run_test=rpc_testscode-review dashpay/dash upstream/develop takeover-7128-clean-backport-27151-25849 "Replacement for dashpay/dash#7128: clean Bitcoin Core backport of #27151 and #25849 with prior review feedback resolved"Breaking Changes
None.
Checklist: