rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) #19528

maflcko · 2020-07-15T19:37:47Z

This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:

Motivation

RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the CRPCCommands and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.

Changes

The changes here add an assert in the CRPCCommand constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the CRPCCommand.

Future work

Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?

Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:

Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static

Bugs found

The assert identified issue rpc: Fix named arguments in documentation #18607
The changes itself fixed bug wallet: Make RPC help compile-time static #19250

DrahtBot · 2020-07-16T04:40:10Z

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

rpc: Add getindexinfo RPC #19550 (rpc: Add getindexinfo RPC by fjahr)
rpc: fix/add missing RPCExamples for "Util" RPCs #18448 (rpc: fix/add missing RPCExamples for "Util" RPCs by theStack)
Log RPC parameters (arguments) if -debug=rpcparams #16365 (Log RPC parameters (arguments) if -debug=rpcparams by LarryRuane)

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.

theStack

Concept ACK. As far as I see, this mainly uses the new CRPCCommand constructor that was introduced in an earlier PR. Will review the main commit more in detail.

src/rpc/server.cpp

maflcko · 2020-08-02T19:13:47Z

Thanks, fixed leftover

This commit has no effect right now, but hardens the code for the future

theStack

ACK fa77de2
For a small code readability nit, I think it makes sense to re-indent after all RPC modules have been updated to use the new RPCHelpMan. The first few ctor arguments to RPCHelpMan seem to be over-indented, while the function body seems under-indented, which looks quite odd. Would personally prefer it like this:

static RPCHelpMan somecoolrpcmethod()
{
    return RPCHelpMan{"name",
        "\ndescription\n",
        {
            ...
        },
        RPCResult{
            ...
        },
        RPCExamples{
            ...
        },
        [&](const RPCHelpMan& self, const JSONRPCRequest& request) -> UniValue
        {
            ...
        },
    };
}

laanwj · 2020-08-07T15:14:44Z

src/rpc/misc.cpp


-    CHECK_NONFATAL(request.params.size() != 100);
+    if (request.params[9].isStr()) {


I don't think multiplexing an argument on string/number type is generally a good idea. Because it's harder to use from some (statically typed) languages, and even from bitcoin-cli I think.. But for a test call ti's fine so no problem here specifically, but it's not something to encourage.

laanwj · 2020-08-07T15:16:26Z

Code review ACK fa77de2

ryanofsky

Code review ACK fa77de2. Pretty straightfoward changes

fjahr · 2020-08-13T15:21:42Z

tested ACK fa77de2

Reviewed code, used the new style from fa77de2 in #19550 and tested the change in echo.

…ommand ones (misc) fa77de2 rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke) fa50bdc rpc: Limit echo to 10 args (MarcoFalke) fa89ca9 refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code (MarcoFalke) fa459bd rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: This is split out from bitcoin#18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr: ### Motivation RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. ### Changes The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`. ### Future work > Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue? Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including: * Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant * Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table * Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan * Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks * Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation * Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static ### Bugs found * The assert identified issue bitcoin#18607 * The changes itself fixed bug bitcoin#19250 ACKs for top commit: laanwj: Code review ACK fa77de2 fjahr: tested ACK fa77de2 theStack: ACK bitcoin@fa77de2 ryanofsky: Code review ACK fa77de2. Pretty straightfoward changes Tree-SHA512: badae1606518c0b55ce2c0bb9025d14f05556532375eb20fd6f3bfadae1e5e6568860bff8599d037e655bf1d23f1f464ca17f4db10a6ab3d502b6e9e61c7b3d3

Summary: This commit has no effect right now, but hardens the code for the future PR description: > Motivation > > RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the CRPCCommands and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here. > > Changes > > The changes here add an assert in the CRPCCommand constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the CRPCCommand. This is a backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#19528 | core#19528]] [1/4] bitcoin/bitcoin@fa459bd Depends on D10010 Test Plan: `ninja all check-all` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D10080

Summary: This is a backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#19528 | core#19528]] [2/4] bitcoin/bitcoin@fa89ca9 Depends on D10080 Test Plan: `ninja all check-all` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D10081

Summary: This is a backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#19528 | core#19528]] [3/4] bitcoin/bitcoin@fa50bdc Note: one line of documentation for the `echo` RPC seems to have been accidentaly deleted in D5920. This restores it before applying the change. Depends on D10081 Test Plan: `ninja && ninja check-functional` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D10082

Summary: This is a backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#19528 | core#19528]] [4/4] bitcoin/bitcoin@fa77de2 Depends on D10082 Test Plan: `ninja all check-all` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D10083

maflcko added Refactoring RPC/REST/ZMQ labels Jul 15, 2020

maflcko force-pushed the 2007-rpcMiscAssert branch 2 times, most recently from faffa2d to fa131b0 Compare July 15, 2020 20:15

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2020

refactor: replace sizeof(a)/sizeof(a[0]) by ARRAYLEN(a) #19626

Closed

theStack reviewed Aug 2, 2020

View reviewed changes

src/rpc/server.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

maflcko force-pushed the 2007-rpcMiscAssert branch from fa131b0 to fa7e8b0 Compare August 2, 2020 19:13

maflcko force-pushed the 2007-rpcMiscAssert branch from fa7e8b0 to fae864b Compare August 2, 2020 19:27

MarcoFalke added 4 commits August 2, 2020 21:32

rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well

fa459bd

This commit has no effect right now, but hardens the code for the future

refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code

fa89ca9

rpc: Limit echo to 10 args

fa50bdc

rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc)

fa77de2

maflcko force-pushed the 2007-rpcMiscAssert branch from fae864b to fa77de2 Compare August 2, 2020 19:33

theStack approved these changes Aug 7, 2020

View reviewed changes

laanwj reviewed Aug 7, 2020

View reviewed changes

ryanofsky approved these changes Aug 12, 2020

View reviewed changes

maflcko merged commit 31760bb into bitcoin:master Aug 14, 2020

maflcko deleted the 2007-rpcMiscAssert branch August 14, 2020 07:40

maflcko mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2020

rpc: Added ability to remove watch only addresses #15129

Closed

This was referenced Aug 14, 2020

wallet: Migrate legacy wallets to descriptor wallets #19602

Merged

The ultimate send RPC #16378

Merged

maflcko mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2020

[tests] Allow outbound & block-relay-only connections in functional tests. #19315

Merged

bitcoin locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 15, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) #19528

rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) #19528

maflcko commented Jul 15, 2020

DrahtBot commented Jul 16, 2020 •

edited

Loading

theStack left a comment

maflcko commented Aug 2, 2020

theStack left a comment

laanwj Aug 7, 2020

laanwj commented Aug 7, 2020

ryanofsky left a comment

fjahr commented Aug 13, 2020


		CHECK_NONFATAL(request.params.size() != 100);
		if (request.params[9].isStr()) {

rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) #19528

rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) #19528

Conversation

maflcko commented Jul 15, 2020

Motivation

Changes

Future work

Bugs found

DrahtBot commented Jul 16, 2020 • edited Loading

Conflicts

theStack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

maflcko commented Aug 2, 2020

theStack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

laanwj Aug 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

laanwj commented Aug 7, 2020

ryanofsky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fjahr commented Aug 13, 2020

DrahtBot commented Jul 16, 2020 •

edited

Loading