-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.6k
doc: Fix incorrect sendmany RPC doc #25093
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
The head ref may contain hidden characters: "2205-doc-rpc-opt-\u{1F688}"
Conversation
|
Rendered diff: diff --git a/sendmany b/sendmany
index 67f8189..6698a7d 100644
--- a/sendmany
+++ b/sendmany
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
-sendmany "" {"address":amount,...} ( minconf "comment" ["address",...] replaceable conf_target "estimate_mode" fee_rate verbose )
+sendmany ( "" ) {"address":amount,...} ( minconf "comment" ["address",...] replaceable conf_target "estimate_mode" fee_rate verbose )
Send multiple times. Amounts are double-precision floating point numbers.
Requires wallet passphrase to be set with walletpassphrase call if wallet is encrypted.
Arguments:
-1. dummy (string, required) Must be set to "" for backwards compatibility.
+1. dummy (string, optional, default="\"\"") Must be set to "" for backwards compatibility.
2. amounts (json object, required) The addresses and amounts
{
"address": amount, (numeric or string, required) The bitcoin address is the key, the numeric amount (can be string) in BTC is the value |
fa078a6 to
fa0b1ca
Compare
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ReviewsSee the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
Github-Pull: bitcoin#25093 Rebased-From: fa0b1cac9daca70bc7a95d1d34604d28979cfd08 [partial]
fa0b1ca to
aed6ce8
Compare
aed6ce8 to
711fb0c
Compare
fa0a6a3 to
fa6f782
Compare
This enables the type check and fixes the wrong docs. Otherwise the enabled check would lead to test errors, such as: > "wallet_labels.py", line 96, in run_test > node.sendmany( > > test_framework.authproxy.JSONRPCException: > JSON value of type null is not of expected type string (-3)
fa6f782 to
fa95f20
Compare
|
Completely reworked this, since the check has been merged, to only fixup the RPC doc |
fanquake
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK fa95f20
fa95f20 doc: Fix incorrect sendmany RPC doc (MarcoFalke) fa96f93 test: Add test for missing and omitted required arg (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This enables the skipped type check for `sendmany` and fixes the resulting error. Also, there is an unrelated test-only commit. ACKs for top commit: fanquake: ACK fa95f20 Tree-SHA512: 6f9992786472d3927485a34e918db76824cfb60fa96f42cc9c3cdba7074fe08c657bd77cb3e748432161a290f2dcf90bb0ece279904bd274c529119e65fa0959
This enables the skipped type check for
sendmanyand fixes the resulting error.Also, there is an unrelated test-only commit.