dash/test/functional/wallet_labels.py

179 lines
6.8 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

#!/usr/bin/env python3
# Copyright (c) 2016-2020 The Bitcoin Core developers
# Distributed under the MIT software license, see the accompanying
# file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.
"""Test label RPCs.
RPCs tested are:
- getaddressesbylabel
- listaddressgroupings
- setlabel
"""
from collections import defaultdict
from test_framework.blocktools import COINBASE_MATURITY
from test_framework.test_framework import BitcoinTestFramework
from test_framework.util import assert_equal, assert_raises_rpc_error
Merge #17578: rpc: simplify getaddressinfo labels, deprecate previous behavior 8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1 doc: update release notes (Jon Atack) 8bb405bbadf11391ccba7b334b4cfe66dc85b390 test: getaddressinfo labels purpose deprecation test (Jon Atack) 60aba1f2f11529add115d963d05599130288ae28 rpc: simplify getaddressinfo labels, deprecate previous behavior (Jon Atack) 7851f14ccf2bcd1e9b2ad48e5e08881be06d9d21 rpc: incorporate review feedback from PR 17283 (Jon Atack) Pull request description: This PR builds on #17283 (now merged) and is followed by #17585. It modifies the value returned by rpc getaddressinfo `labels` to an array of label name strings and deprecates the previous behavior of returning an array of JSON hash structures containing label `name` and address `purpose` key/value pairs. before ``` "labels": [ { "name": "DOUBLE SPEND", "purpose": "receive" } ``` after ``` "labels": [ "DOUBLE SPEND" ] ``` The deprecated behavior can be re-enabled by starting bitcoind with `-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose`. For context, see: - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17283#issuecomment-554458001 - http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2019-12-13.html#l-425 (lines 425-427) - http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2019-11-22.html#l-622 Reviewers: This PR may be tested manually by building, then running bitcoind with and without the `-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose` flag while verifying the rpc getaddressinfo help text and `labels` output. Next steps: deprecate the rpc getaddressinfo `label` field (EDIT: done in #17585) and add support for multiple labels per address. This PR will unblock those. ACKs for top commit: jnewbery: reACK 8925df8 promag: Code review ACK 8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1. meshcollider: Code review ACK 8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1 Tree-SHA512: c2b717209996da32b6484de7bb8800e7048410f9ce6afdb3e02a6866bd4a8f2c730f905fca27b10b877b91cf407f546e69e8c4feb9cd934325a6c71c166bd438
2020-01-07 23:23:58 +01:00
from test_framework.wallet_util import test_address
class WalletLabelsTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
def set_test_params(self):
self.setup_clean_chain = True
self.num_nodes = 1
def skip_test_if_missing_module(self):
self.skip_if_no_wallet()
def run_test(self):
# Check that there's no UTXO on the node
node = self.nodes[0]
assert_equal(len(node.listunspent()), 0)
# Note each time we call generate, all generated coins go into
# the same address, so we call twice to get two addresses w/500 each
node.generatetoaddress(nblocks=1, address=node.getnewaddress(label='coinbase'))
node.generatetoaddress(nblocks=COINBASE_MATURITY + 1, address=node.getnewaddress(label='coinbase'))
assert_equal(node.getbalance(), 1000)
# there should be 2 address groups
# each with 1 address with a balance of 500 Dash
address_groups = node.listaddressgroupings()
assert_equal(len(address_groups), 2)
# the addresses aren't linked now, but will be after we send to the
# common address
linked_addresses = set()
for address_group in address_groups:
assert_equal(len(address_group), 1)
assert_equal(len(address_group[0]), 3)
assert_equal(address_group[0][1], 500)
assert_equal(address_group[0][2], 'coinbase')
linked_addresses.add(address_group[0][0])
# send 500 from each address to a third address not in this wallet
common_address = "yd5KMREs3GLMe6mTJYr3YrH1juwNwrFCfB"
node.sendmany(
amounts={common_address: 1000},
minconf=1,
addlocked=False,
comment="",
subtractfeefrom=[common_address],
)
# there should be 1 address group, with the previously
# unlinked addresses now linked (they both have 0 balance)
address_groups = node.listaddressgroupings()
assert_equal(len(address_groups), 1)
assert_equal(len(address_groups[0]), 2)
assert_equal(set([a[0] for a in address_groups[0]]), linked_addresses)
assert_equal([a[1] for a in address_groups[0]], [0, 0])
node.generate(1)
# we want to reset so that the "" label has what's expected.
# otherwise we're off by exactly the fee amount as that's mined
# and matures in the next 100 blocks
amount_to_send = 1.0
# Create labels and make sure subsequent label API calls
# recognize the label/address associations.
labels = [Label(name) for name in ("a", "b", "c", "d", "e")]
for label in labels:
address = node.getnewaddress(label.name)
label.add_receive_address(address)
label.verify(node)
# Check all labels are returned by listlabels.
assert_equal(node.listlabels(), sorted(['coinbase'] + [label.name for label in labels]))
# Send a transaction to each label.
for label in labels:
node.sendtoaddress(label.addresses[0], amount_to_send)
label.verify(node)
# Check the amounts received.
node.generate(1)
for label in labels:
assert_equal(
node.getreceivedbyaddress(label.addresses[0]), amount_to_send)
assert_equal(node.getreceivedbylabel(label.name), amount_to_send)
for i, label in enumerate(labels):
to_label = labels[(i + 1) % len(labels)]
node.sendtoaddress(to_label.addresses[0], amount_to_send)
node.generate(1)
for label in labels:
address = node.getnewaddress(label.name)
label.add_receive_address(address)
label.verify(node)
assert_equal(node.getreceivedbylabel(label.name), 2)
label.verify(node)
node.generate(COINBASE_MATURITY + 1)
# Check that setlabel can assign a label to a new unused address.
for label in labels:
address = node.getnewaddress()
node.setlabel(address, label.name)
label.add_address(address)
label.verify(node)
assert_raises_rpc_error(-11, "No addresses with label", node.getaddressesbylabel, "")
# Check that addmultisigaddress can assign labels.
for label in labels:
addresses = []
Merge #19674: refactor: test: use throwaway _ variable for unused loop counters dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 refactor: test: use _ variable for unused loop counters (Sebastian Falbesoner) Pull request description: This tiny PR substitutes Python loops in the form of `for x in range(N): ...` by `for _ in range(N): ...` where applicable. The idea is indicating to the reader that a block (or statement, in list comprehensions) is just repeated N times, and that the loop counter is not used in the body, hence using the throwaway variable. This is already done quite often in the current tests (see e.g. `$ git grep "for _ in range("`). Another alternative would be using `itertools.repeat` (according to Python core developer Raymond Hettinger it's [even faster](https://twitter.com/raymondh/status/1144527183341375488)), but that doesn't seem to be widespread in use and I'm not sure about a readability increase. The only drawback I see is that whenever one wants to debug loop iterations, one would need to introduce a loop variable again. Reviewing this is basically a no-brainer, since tests would fail immediately if a a substitution has taken place on a loop where the variable is used. Instances to replace were found by `$ git grep "for.*in range("` and manually checked. ACKs for top commit: darosior: ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 instagibbs: manual inspection ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19674/commits/dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 practicalswift: ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 -- the updated code is easier to reason about since the throwaway nature of a variable is expressed explicitly (using the Pythonic `_` idiom) instead of implicitly. Explicit is better than implicit was we all know by now :) Tree-SHA512: 5f43ded9ce14e5e00b3876ec445b90acda1842f813149ae7bafa93f3ac3d510bb778e2c701187fd2c73585e6b87797bb2d2987139bd1a9ba7d58775a59392406
2020-08-11 02:50:34 +02:00
for _ in range(10):
addresses.append(node.getnewaddress())
multisig_address = node.addmultisigaddress(5, addresses, label.name)['address']
label.add_address(multisig_address)
label.purpose[multisig_address] = "send"
label.verify(node)
node.generate(COINBASE_MATURITY + 1)
# Check that setlabel can change the label of an address from a
# different label.
change_label(node, labels[0].addresses[0], labels[0], labels[1])
# Check that setlabel can set the label of an address already
# in the label. This is a no-op.
change_label(node, labels[2].addresses[0], labels[2], labels[2])
class Label:
def __init__(self, name):
# Label name
self.name = name
# Current receiving address associated with this label.
self.receive_address = None
# List of all addresses assigned with this label
self.addresses = []
# Map of address to address purpose
self.purpose = defaultdict(lambda: "receive")
def add_address(self, address):
assert_equal(address not in self.addresses, True)
self.addresses.append(address)
def add_receive_address(self, address):
self.add_address(address)
def verify(self, node):
if self.receive_address is not None:
assert self.receive_address in self.addresses
for address in self.addresses:
2020-02-02 09:35:24 +01:00
test_address(node, address, labels=[self.name])
Merge #17283: rpc: improve getaddressinfo test coverage, help, code docs 33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151 test: add rpc getaddressinfo labels test coverage (Jon Atack) 0f3539ac6d772fc646b5f184fa1efe77bf632f6a test: add listlabels test in wallet_labels.py (Jon Atack) 1388de83900eaced906d369fe9e8887ae74b2dcf rpc: add getaddressinfo code documentation (Jon Atack) 2ee0cb3330ccf70f0540cb42370796e32eff1569 rpc: update getaddressinfo RPCExamples to bech32 (Jon Atack) 8d1ed0c263f8cdff7189f02040b5d02238d93da0 rpc: clarify label vs labels in getaddressinfo RPCHelpman (Jon Atack) 5a0ed850700dfb19167d40b38f80313bd5e427ca rpc: improve getaddressinfo RPCHelpman content (Jon Atack) 70cda342cd20d0e0cd9f28405457544036968f2d rpc: improve getaddressinfo RPCHelpman formatting (Jon Atack) Pull request description: This PR is a continuation of the work in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12892. Main motivations: - There is currently no test coverage for the getaddressinfo `labels` response. Coverage here is a prerequisite before deprecating the `label` response or adding multiple labels per address. - `bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` returns a few content errors, difficult-to-read formatting, and no explanation why it returns both `label` and `labels` and how they relate, which can be confusing for application developers. Changes by order of commits: - [x] improve/fix getaddressinfo RPCHelpman layout formatting - [x] improve/fix getaddressinfo RPCHelpman content - [x] clarify the `label` and `labels` fields in getaddressinfo RPCHelpman - [x] update getaddressinfo RPCExamples addresses to bech32 - [x] add getaddressinfo code docs - [x] add a `listlabels` test assertion in wallet_labels.py - [x] add missing getaddressinfo `labels` test coverage and improve the existing `label` tests Here are gists of the CLI help output: [`bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` before this PR](https://gist.github.com/jonatack/022af5221a85c069780359a22643c810) [`bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` after this PR](https://gist.github.com/jonatack/4ee5f6abc62a3d99269570206a5f90ba) It seems we ought to begin a deprecation process for the getaddressinfo `label` field? If yes, I have a follow-up ready. _--> EDIT: Deprecation follow-ups #17578 and #17585 now build on this PR._ ACKs for top commit: fjahr: Re-ACK 33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151 jnewbery: ACK 33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151. Tree-SHA512: a001aa863090ec2566a31059477945b1c303ebeb430b33472f8b150e420fa5742fc33bca9d95571746395b607f43f6078dd5b53e238ac1f3fc648b51c8f79a07
2019-11-26 16:57:23 +01:00
assert self.name in node.listlabels()
assert_equal(
node.getaddressesbylabel(self.name),
{address: {"purpose": self.purpose[address]} for address in self.addresses})
def change_label(node, address, old_label, new_label):
assert_equal(address in old_label.addresses, True)
node.setlabel(address, new_label.name)
old_label.addresses.remove(address)
new_label.add_address(address)
old_label.verify(node)
new_label.verify(node)
if __name__ == '__main__':
WalletLabelsTest().main()