Merge #13669: Tests: Cleanup create_transaction implementations

44bbceeef1 [Tests] Cleanup feature_block.py, remove unnecessary PreviousSpendableOutput object (Conor Scott)
736f941424 [Tests] Cleanup extra instances of create_transaction (Conor Scott)
157651855f [Tests] Rename create_tx and move to blocktools.py (Conor Scott)

Pull request description:

  There currently exist seven ([1](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_cltv.py#L52-L60), [2](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_csv_activation.py#L88-L95) [3](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_dersig.py#L40-L48), [4](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_nulldummy.py#L100-L108), [5](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/util.py#L529-L535), [6](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/blocktools.py#L120-L129), [7](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_block.py#L1218-L1220)) implementations of a function called something similar to `create_transaction` in the functional tests, some of which are exact copies of each other.

  This PR aims to clean this up into [three different cases implemented in blocktools.py](https://github.com/conscott/bitcoin/blob/create_tx_cleanup/test/functional/test_framework/blocktools.py#L121-L149)
  1. `create_tx_with_script`: Return transaction object spending generic tx output optionally specifying scriptSig and scriptPubKey
  2. `create_transaction`: Return transaction object spending coinbase tx
  2. `create_raw_transaction`: Return raw transaction (hex string) spending coinbase tx

  I am not committed to any of these function names, so I'll gladly take suggestions on there.

  Additionally there are some related cleanups to feature_block.py tests, specifically removing the [PreviousSpendableOutput](https://github.com/conscott/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_block.py#L51-L54) object, which seems like an unnecessary layer given that every instance spends the 0 output.

Tree-SHA512: 63c6233b6f0942c81ba1ca67ea6770809b8c9409314c6d4cf8e5a3991cb9ee92b22bebe88c0dde45cd71e754eb351230c4c404b70ff118f5f43c034452ada65c

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/test/functional/p2p_unrequested_blocks.py b/test/functional/p2p_unrequested_blocks.py
index 04a81b0be5..23175bf4a9 100755
--- a/test/functional/p2p_unrequested_blocks.py
+++ b/test/functional/p2p_unrequested_blocks.py
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ from test_framework.mininode import *
 from test_framework.test_framework import BitcoinTestFramework
 from test_framework.util import *
 import time
-from test_framework.blocktools import create_block, create_coinbase, create_transaction
+from test_framework.blocktools import create_block, create_coinbase, create_tx_with_script
 
 
 class AcceptBlockTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
@@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ class AcceptBlockTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
         block_290f.solve()
         block_291 = create_block(block_290f.sha256, create_coinbase(291), block_290f.nTime+1)
         # block_291 spends a coinbase below maturity!
-        block_291.vtx.append(create_transaction(block_290f.vtx[0], 0, b"42", 1))
+        block_291.vtx.append(create_tx_with_script(block_290f.vtx[0], 0, script_sig=b"42", amount=1))
         block_291.hashMerkleRoot = block_291.calc_merkle_root()
         block_291.solve()
         block_292 = create_block(block_291.sha256, create_coinbase(292), block_291.nTime+1)