diff options
author | MarcoFalke <falke.marco@gmail.com> | 2021-07-28 18:19:38 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | MarcoFalke <falke.marco@gmail.com> | 2021-07-28 18:19:50 +0200 |
commit | 4b1fb50def0dea0cd320bc43c12d9a12edde0390 (patch) | |
tree | a1f6074da1ec3c297bf380a15982538bd3d51eea /doc/files.md | |
parent | 67b9416540566794c39425b38bc83ad138371ddf (diff) | |
parent | f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec (diff) | |
download | bitcoin-4b1fb50def0dea0cd320bc43c12d9a12edde0390.tar.xz |
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22528: refactor: move GetTransaction to node/transaction.cpp
f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec doc: GetTransaction()/getrawtransaction follow-ups to #22383 (John Newbery)
abc57e1f0882a1a2bb20474648419979af6e383d refactor: move `GetTransaction(...)` to node/transaction.cpp (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
~This PR is based on #22383, which should be reviewed first~ (merged by now).
In [yesterday's PR review club session to PR 22383](https://bitcoincore.reviews/22383), the idea of moving the function `GetTransaction(...)` from src/validation.cpp to src/node/transaction.cpp came up. With this, the circular dependency "index/txindex -> validation -> index/txindex" is removed (see change in `lint-circular-dependencies.sh`). Thanks to jnewbery for suggesting and to sipa for providing historical background.
Relevant IRC log:
```
17:52 <jnewbery> Was anyone surprised that GetTransaction() is in validation.cpp? It seems to me that node/transaction.cpp would be a more appropriate place for it.
17:53 <raj_> jnewbery, +1
17:53 <stickies-v> agreed!
17:54 <glozow> jnewbery ya
17:54 <jnewbery> seems weird that validation would call into txindex. I wonder if we remove this function, then validation would no longer need to #include txindex
17:54 <sipa> GetTransaction predates node/transaction.cpp, and even the generic index framework itself :)
17:55 <sipa> (before 0.8, validation itself used the txindex)
17:55 <jnewbery> (and GetTransaction() seems like a natural sibling to BroadcastTransaction(), which is already in node/transaction.cpp)
17:55 <jnewbery> sipa: right, this is not meant as a criticism of course. Just wondering if we can organize things a bit more rationally now that we have better separation between things.
17:55 <sipa> jnewbery: sure, just providing background
17:56 <sipa> seems very reasonable to move it elsewhere now
```
The commit should be trivial to review with `--color-moved`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
rajarshimaitra:
tACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22528/commits/f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
mjdietzx:
crACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
LarryRuane:
Code review, test ACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
Tree-SHA512: 0e844a6ecb1be04c638b55bc4478c2949549a4fcae01c984eee078de74d176fb19d508fc09360a62ad130677bfa7daf703b67870800e55942838d7313246248c
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/files.md')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions