feat(rawtx): add decodeRawTransaction function #1963
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Code Climate has analyzed commit 50c1e3f and detected 0 issues on this pull request. View more on Code Climate. |
✅ Deploy Preview for jellyfishsdk ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
Codecov ReportBase: 90.62% // Head: 92.13% // Increases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1963 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.62% 92.13% +1.51%
==========================================
Files 365 367 +2
Lines 10757 10779 +22
Branches 1378 1377 -1
==========================================
+ Hits 9748 9931 +183
+ Misses 953 810 -143
+ Partials 56 38 -18
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
|
Docker build preview for jellyfish/apps is ready! Built with commit 285b933
You can also get an immutable image with the commit hash
|
DocteurPing
changed the title
fuxingloh
reviewed
Jan 11, 2023
Comment on lines
18
to
33
| it('should decode a witness transaction', async () => { | ||
| const encrawtx = '010000000001010000000000000072c1a6a246ae63f74f931e8365e15a089c68d61900000000000000000000ffffffff0100e1f50500000000000102616100000000' | ||
| const decrawtx = await client.rawtx.decodeRawTransaction(encrawtx, true) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vout[0].value).toStrictEqual(1) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| it('should throw an error when for decode as non-witness a witness transaction', async () => { | ||
| const encrawtx = '010000000001010000000000000072c1a6a246ae63f74f931e8365e15a089c68d61900000000000000000000ffffffff0100e1f50500000000000102616100000000' | ||
| await expect(client.rawtx.decodeRawTransaction(encrawtx, false)).rejects.toThrow(RpcApiError) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| it('should decode a non-witness transaction', async () => { | ||
| const encrawtx = '01000000010000000000000072c1a6a246ae63f74f931e8365e15a089c68d61900000000000000000000ffffffff0100e1f505000000000000000000' | ||
| const decrawtx = await client.rawtx.decodeRawTransaction(encrawtx, true) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vout[0].value).toStrictEqual(1) | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assert everything, you need to assert how each rawtx get decoded into explicitly.
DocteurPing
requested review from
canonbrother and
ivan-zynesis
as code owners
fuxingloh
reviewed
Jan 12, 2023
Comment on lines
22
to
36
| expect(decrawtx.txid).toStrictEqual('d006b4ece5d4adbd6f46b3a6f65f4a230caf6c44d8510e4340d0f26b7ceeb44a') | ||
| expect(decrawtx.hash).toStrictEqual('23f0c1f68f0a43bb434494933a5a0f6f9636261f33b036b7700d96e264aceeda') | ||
| expect(decrawtx.version).toStrictEqual(1) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.size).toStrictEqual(66) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vsize).toStrictEqual(62) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.weight).toStrictEqual(246) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.locktime).toStrictEqual(0) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].txid).toStrictEqual('000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c17200000000000000') | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].vout).toStrictEqual(0) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].scriptSig.asm).toStrictEqual('') | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].scriptSig.hex).toStrictEqual('') | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].txinwitness).toStrictEqual(['6161']) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vin[0].sequence).toStrictEqual(4294967295) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vout[0].value).toStrictEqual(1) | ||
| expect(decrawtx.vout[0].n).toStrictEqual(0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
expect(object).toStrictEqual({
pool: '',
ABC: expect.any(String),
txid: expect.stringMatching(/^[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}$/)
})
Prefer we use an object matcher assertion, we started to deprecate the use of individual assertions.
fuxingloh
suggested changes
Jan 13, 2023
Comment on lines
76
to
98
| expect.objectContaining({ | ||
| txid: '000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c17200000000000000', | ||
| vout: 0, | ||
| scriptSig: | ||
| expect.objectContaining({ | ||
| asm: '', | ||
| hex: '' | ||
| }), | ||
| sequence: 4294967295 | ||
| }) | ||
| ], | ||
| vout: [ | ||
| expect.objectContaining({ | ||
| value: 1, | ||
| n: 0, | ||
| scriptPubKey: | ||
| expect.objectContaining({ | ||
| asm: '', | ||
| hex: '', | ||
| type: 'nonstandard' | ||
| }) | ||
| }) | ||
| ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can this be explicitly defined instead of expect.objectContaining()? What was the reason for using expect.objectContaining()?
packages/jellyfish-api-core/__tests__/category/rawtx/decodeRawTransaction.test.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/jellyfish-api-core/__tests__/category/rawtx/decodeRawTransaction.test.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| import { ContainerAdapterClient } from '../../container_adapter_client' | ||
| import { RpcApiError } from '../../../src' | ||
|
|
||
| describe('poolpair update', () => { |
Co-authored-by: Fuxing Loh <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: DrPing <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Fuxing Loh <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: DrPing <[email protected]>
fuxingloh
approved these changes
Jan 13, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds the function decodeRawTransaction.