The meaning is clear from the context, and we're inconsistent here.
Also save typing when using named arguments.
- `bitcoinaddress` -> `address`
- `bitcoinprivkey` -> `privkey`
- `bitcoinpubkey` -> `pubkey`
The [JSON-RPC specification](http://www.jsonrpc.org/specification) allows passing parameters as an Array, for by-position
arguments, or an Object, for by-name arguments.
This implements by-name arguments, but preserves full backwards compatibility. API using by-name arguments are
easier to extend, and easier to use (no need to guess which argument goes where).
Named are mapped to positions by a per-call structure, provided through the RPC command table.
Missing arguments will be replaced by null, except if at the end, then the argument is left out completely.
Currently calls fail (though not crash) on intermediate nulls, but this should be improved on a per-call basis later.
Make a more conservative notion of whether the node is caught up to the rest of the network and only count transactions as fee estimation data points if the node is caught up.
All decisions about whether the transactions are valid data points are made at the time the transaction arrives. Updating on blocks all the time will now cause stale fee estimates to decay quickly when we restart a node.
Fee estimation can just check its own mapMemPoolTxs to determine the same information. Note that now fee estimation for block processing must happen before those transactions are removed, but this shoudl be a speedup.
This was an oversight, where blocks and mempool tracking were ignored during IBD, but transactions that arrived during IBD but were included in blocks after IBD were not ignored.
Once priority estimation was removed, not all transactions in the mempool are tracked in the fee estimation mempool tracking. So there is no error if a transaction is not found for removal.
We were marking coins FRESH before being sure they were not overwriting dirty undo data. This condition was never reached in existing code because undo data was always flushed before UpdateCoins was called with new transactions, but could have been exposed in an otherwise safe refactor.
Clarify in the comments the assumptions made in ModifyNewCoins.
Add ability to undo transactions to UpdateCoins unit test.
Thanks to Russ Yanofsky for suggestion on how to make logic clearer and fixing up the ccoins_modify_new test cases.
Surprisingly this hasn't been causing me any issues while testing, probably
because it requires lots of large blocks to be flying around.
Send/Recv corks need tests!
- Drop the interruption point directly after the pnode allocation. This would
be leaky if hit.
- Rearrange thread creation so that the socket handler comes first
Jonas Schnelli